


\ 




■ 







Equity 

[Formerly Equity Series] 

Devoted to Improved Methods of Self-Government, as the Initiative, 
^Referendum, Recall, Proportional Representation, Direct Primaries, the 
Preferential 'Ballot, the Short Ballot, etc., and the simplification and 
increased efficiency of Government in Municipalities, States and Nation. 



15 cent s gSg?y Quarterly Philadelphia, January, 1914 

Contents 

* Page 

National Presidential Primaries y^& '£$^V ^ 

Coming Constitutional Conventions 

Constitutional Situation in Illinois v 

State Legislatures ;.' 8 

Legislative Sessions During 1914 \: 12 

Representation .-.- * 12 

A Sample "Gateway" Amendment \$i v ~ ^ 

Other "Gateway" Proposals 18 

Preferential Voting in Currency Law 19 

DIRECT LEGISLATION RECORD: 

The Progressii'e Party and the I., R. and R 20 

Republican Use of the Referendum 28 

THE MARCH OF POPULAR GOVERNMENT— Being a Quarterly Record 

of the Progress of Direct Legislation in the Various States 29 

Arkansas 29 Kansas 32 New York 35 

California 29 Kentucky 32 North Carolina 37 

Connecticut 29 Maine 33 Ohio 38 

Delaware 30 Maryland 33 Oregon 39 

District of Columbia.. 31 Massachusetts 34 Pennsylvania 40 

Illinois 31 Michigan 35 Washington 41 

Mr. Toft and the L and R 42 

PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION REVIEW: 

C. G. Hoag, Editor 

How Shall We Choose Our Presidents /. DeLancey Verplanck 43 

The Movement for Electoral Reform in France 47 

Holland and Denmark 47 

The Progress of P. R 47 

A Protest 51 

Financial Statement 52 

THE SHORT BALLOT DEPARTMENT: 

H. S. Gilbertson, Editor 

Short Ballot Movement in New York 53 

The County Problem 53 

The Judiciary 55 

Growth of the City Manager Plan 55 

The Ohio Defeat 56 



' J r 



EQUITY SERIES 

Edited and Published by C. F. Taylor 



"RATIONAL MONEY." By Prof. Frank Parsons, of Boston University 
Law School. The only book on the money question which is fair and 
just to gold, silver, and every other product. This is the only fair and 
final solution of the money question that has yet been prepared. Paper 
Covers. Price, 25c. 

"THE LAND QUESTION FROM VARIOUS POINTS OF VIEW." By 
Various Writers. History of Land Titles, Alien Landlordism in 
America, the Single Tax pro and con, John Stuart Mills' plan of Land 
Reform, etc., etc. No other single book gives the various phases of 
the land question. No student of the land question and really no voter 
can afford to be without this book. Paper Covers. Price, 25c. 

"THE TELEGRAPH MONOPOLY." By Prof. Frank Parsons, of Boston 
University Law School. Here this question is presented in a fullness 
and completeness never before attempted. Paper Covers. Price, 25c. 

"THE BONDAGE OF CITIES." Consists of Chapter III from "The City 
for the People," with important new matter, and a Model Charter, for 
the preparation of which a fee of $100 was paid. Paper Covers. 
Price, 25c. 

"THE ORGANIZATION AND CONTROL OF INDUSTRIAL CORPORA- 
TIONS." 3y F. E. Horack, A.M., Ph.D. Reviews the corporation 
laws of all of our states, showing their diversity, complexity, and incon- 
gruity, and showing the need of a National Incorporating Law. Paper 
Covers. 207 Pages. Price, 25c. 

"THE STORY OF NEW ZEALAND." By Prof. Frank Parsons, Edited 
by C. F. Taylor. A volume describing the land and labor laws, com- 
pulsory arbitration, progressive taxation, co-operative industry, public 
enterprises, and novel methods in government established in New Zea- 
land, including government insurance, etc., etc. A magnificent, illus- 
trated, cloth bound volume of 860 pages. Price, $3.00. 

"ELEMENTS OF TAXATION." By N. M. Taylor. The only popular 
book on the general subject of Taxation ever published. 168 pages. 
Price, 25c. 

"THE RAILWAYS, THE TRUSTS, AND THE PEOPLE." By Prof. 
Frank Parsons. In two parts. Part I, Relations of the Railways to 
the Public. Part II, The Railroad Problem in the Light of Compara- 
tive Railroad History Covering the Leading Systems of Three Conti- 
nents. Price, 25c. per part in paper covers. Both parts bound together 
in a single volume in cloth, over 400 pages, $1.50. 

Address EQUITY SERIES 

1520 CHESTNUT STREET PHILADELPHIA, PA. 

STATEMENT 

of the ownership and management of Equity Series, published quarterly 
at 1520 Chestnut Street, Philadelphia, Pa., required by the Act of August 
24, 1912. 

Editor, Managing Editor, Business Manager and Publisher, C. F. Tavlor 
1520 Chestnut Street. 

Owner, C. F. Taylor, 1520 Chestnut Street. 
No bondholders or mortgagees. 

C. F. TAYLOR. 
Sworn to and subscribed before me this 17th day of September, 1913. 

Mary E. Hamer, Notary PublU. 
My commission expires January 25. 1915 



Equity 



f Formerly Equity Series] 

Including the Direct Legislation Record, the Referendum News and the 
Proportional Representation Review. 



Charles Fremont Taylor 

Editor and Publisher 

1520 Chestnut St., Philadelphia, Pa. 

EDITORIAL COUNCIL 

Eltweed Pomeroy, Donna, Texas 

Founder of the Direct Legislation Record 
W. S. U'Ren, Oregon 
Geo. H. Shibley, Washington, D. C. 

Founder of the Referendum S'rut 
Rob't L. Owen, 

U. S. Senator from Oklahoma 
Delos F. Wilcox, New York 

WOODBRIDGE N. FERRIS 

Governor of Michigan 
George H. Hodges, 

Governor of Kansas 
L. F. C. Garvin 

Ex-Governor of Rhode Island 
J. H. Ralston, Washington, D. C. 
Dr. Wm. Preston Hill, Missouri 
Carl Vrooman, Illinois 
Geo. H. Duncan, New Hampshire 
Lieut. C. P. Shaw, Virginia 

Entered at the Philadelphia Post Office 
as Second-class Matter 



Single copies, 15 cents; 50 cents per year; three years, 
$1. To facilitate the spread of the causes represented by 
this magazine, four yearly subscriptions will be sent to 
different addresses for $1; special rates for yearly sub- 
scriptions or single numbers for propaganda purposes 
supplied on application. 



Vol. XVI— No. 1 



January, 1914 



National Presidential Primaries. 
President Wilson's proposal for na- 
tional presidential primaries foreshadows 
the most tremendous single step in 
democracy that this country has ever 
seen. But he seems to consider the 
problem a very easy one. His words 
are: "I turn to a subject which I hope 
can be handled promptly and without 
any serious controversy of any kind. 
I mean the method of selecting nomi- 
nees for the presidency of the United 
States. I feel confident that I do not 
misinterpret the wishes or the expec- 
tations of the country when I urge the 
prompt enactment of legislation which 
will provide for primary elections 



throughout the country at which the 
voters of the several parties may choose 
their nominees for the presidency with- 
out the intervention of nominating con- 
ventions." 

This is likely to bring up the whole 
matter of selecting a president, involv- 
ing the electoral system, which has been 
for many, many years only an empty 
shell. Also few realize that a primary 
may be so conducted as to result in 
an election. Some local primary laws 
provide that if any candidate shall com- 
mand a majority of all the votes cast 
at the primary, it shall be declared an 
election. This is obvious. By a prefer- 
ential system this could easily be done, 
and under such circumstances one elec- 
tion would be sufficient — that is, the 
primary would become the real elec- 
tion. This matter is treated in another 
article in this issue from an entirely 
different point of view : that of select- 
ing presidential electors from each state 
by a proportional system. After the 
electoral difficulties of 1876, a con- 
gressional committee was appointed to 
propose legislation under which such a 
situation would not arise again. The 
committee proposed and urged that the 
electors of each state be divided among 
the parties in proportion to the vote 
cast for each party in each state. That 
would have been a kind of proportional 
plan, and fair to all, but Congress 
was so busy at that time with other 
matters that the task of improving 
election processes was soon lost sight of. 

But the President's proposition is only 
for selecting party candidates. And the 
consequent legislation, if any, will be 
confined strictly to this proposition. 
Perhaps a bill will be formulated and 



Equity 



presented in harmony with the views 
and wishes of the administration, what- 
ever they may be. At present the most 
ambitious and complete proposition that 
we have for consideration is the Cum- 
mins bill (Senate bill No. 773), intro- 
duced April 12, 1913. This bill pro- 
vides that, as a condition for recognition, 
a candidate must be nominated by a 
"nomination paper" (petition) which 
shall be filed with the national board 
(which is provided) "at least forty-five 
days prior to the date fixed for holding 
the primary election." The nomination 
papers for president or vice-president 
shall consist of "at least one-half of 
one per centum of the voters of the 
party (as shown by the returns of the 
last general election) in each of at least 
five states, and in the aggregate not less 
than one-fourth of one per centum of 
the total vote of his party as shown by 
the returns of the last general election 
in the United States." Candidates so 
presented will have their names printed 
on the official ballot of the party; but a 
blank space is left under each party 
name in which any voter may write any 
name not printed; and there is a column 
on the official ballot provided for 
headed "Independent of Party," with 
blank spaces in which name or names 
may be written by voters who do not 
wish to vote under any party. 

It would be easy for the friends of 
any popular candidate to secure petitions 
of one-half of 1% in each of five 
states — the home state of the candidate 
and the easiest of other states would 
be chosen. But the total must equal 
not less than one-fourth of 1% of the 
total vote of the party in the entire 
United States. The total vote of the 
two leading parties has been, for the 
last several presidental elections, about 
six or seven million votes, until the elec- 
tion of 1912, when the votes of the two 
leading parties were divided into three, 
the highest slightly exceeding 6,000,000 
votes. Mr. Bryan's total always ex- 



ceeded 6,000,000. So suppose we take 
6,000,000 as a basis for calculation for 
the largest petition necessary. One per 
cent, of 6,000,000 is 60,000. One-fourth 
of this is 15,000 — not a large number of 
signatures to secure for a popular can- 
didate. 

This is perhaps an effort to discour- 
age numerous "favorite son" candi- 
dacies. Would it do it? Some, with 
no popularity beyond the boundaries of 
their state, would be thus kept off the 
official ballot. Others would not be 
kept off. And in an election in which 
a half dozen or possibly a dozen can- 
didates' names are printed on the bal- 
lot, what would be the result? The 
Cummins bill provides that "the can- 
didate of each political party for Presi- 
dent of the United States and for Vice- 
President of the United States who has 
received the highest number of votes in 
the United States shall be duly and 
legally named as the candidate of his 
party for such office, and entitled to 
have his name printed on the official 
ballots to be voted at the general elec- 
tion * * *" 

"The highest number of votes." when 
there are several contending candidates, 
would probably be far from a majority. 
Thus the candidate of possibly every 
party would usually, if not always, be 
a minority candidate, and in many in- 
stances the vote of the successful can- 
didate would be a small percentage, 
possibly as low as 25%, of the total 
vote. In the Republican national con- 
vention a majority of the delegates is 
required to determine a nomination, 
and in the Democratic national conven- 
tion a two-thirds majority is required. 
Permitting a nomination by a minority 
vote is taking a step backward. Can H 
be avoided in any scheme for direct 
nominations? If so. how? 

One way would be to make the 
ditions for the printing of the name of 
any candidate on the official ballot so 
severe that only the two most popular 



Equity 



candidates could succeed in meeting the 
conditions. This would be impossible, 
for sometimes only one candidate would 
succeed, and then the choice of a presi- 
dent might be determined by the strug- 
gle for names on petitions, which would 
be a tremendous step backward; and 
as frequently three or more candidates 
might meet the conditions, and then 
the election would result in a minority 
choice, as before. The only way out is 
some plan of preferential voting. This 
general subject we will not discuss here, 
as it has been treated in these pages 
several times in the past year. We wish 
here only to emphasize the fact that 
some form of preferential voting is ab- 
solutely necessary in order to get a 
free expression of choices by the voters, 
and at the same time the real choice of 
the party. 

One paragraph of Senator Cummins' 
bill (page 7, lines 6 to 10) reads as fol- 
lows (italics ours) : 

In each party column there shall be a suf- 
ficient number of lines left blank so that each 
elector shall have the opportunity to vote for 
his preference as the candidate of his party, 
even though the name of his preference is not 
printed on the ballot. 

This paragraph would be improved 
by substituting the word choice for 
"preference." Some states have what 
are erroneously called "preferential 
presidential primaries," indicating that 
the most popular candidate in that state 
is determined by some plan of prefer- 
ential voting, which is not true — but 
should be true. The words "preference" 
and "preferential"' should not be used 
in a way to mislead. 

The "preferential ballot" is now un- 
derstood to mean a ballot upon which 
multiple choices may be expressed, as 
1st preference or choice, 2d preference, 
3d preference, etc., in the counting of 
which these preferences are taken into 
consideration if no candidate has a ma- 
jority on first preference. The word 
"preference" should be reserved for use 



only in relation to a ballot permitting an 
expression of more than one choice. The 
word "choice" should be used when only 
a single expression or a first choice only 
is permitted. 

The date set by the Cummins bill for 
the national presidential primary is the 
second Monday in July of the presi- 
dential election year — in the midst of 
the harvest season in some sections, 
and in the midst of the vacation season 
for many — hot weather! An earlier 
date would make the "forty-five days 
prior" come too early — too far from 
the November election. To move the 
primary to say about the 10th or 15th 
of September would, in the opinion of 
many, make the campaign too short. 
But would it? Our national political 
campaigns are much longer than those 
of other countries. Is it necessary that 
they should be so long? The writer 
thinks not. 

Let the national presidential prima- 
ries be truly democratic. The forcing 
of minority candidates upon the voters 
of parties is not democratic. 



Coming Constitutional Conventions. 

Was it the overhauling given to the 
Ohio constitution in 1912 that has caused 
such a widespread demand for consti- 
tutional conventions in other states? 
or was it "in the air" as a result of 
widening knowledge of our awkward 
and imperfect methods of government, 
and the great success of the "commis- 
sion plan" and other improvements in 
city government? The conviction is 
spreading and deepening that our state 
constitutions do not meet the require- 
ments of the present time. 

In last Equity (October), pages 206, 
216 and 227, we stated that at the regu- 
lar election in November, 1914, the 
voters of Indiana and South Dakota 
will vote on the question, shall a con- 
stitutional convention be called? Now 
New York charges to the front, and will 



Equity 



submit the same question at a special 
election on the first Tuesday in April, 1914. 
If all these states shall vote in the af- 
firmative, which they probably will, we 
shall have three interesting constitu- 
tional conventions in 1915, New York 
perhaps beginning the earliest. Possibly 
some other states may come forward in 
the meantime and order a convention 
in 1915, but we hope not. New York, 
Indiana and South Dakota will be all 
that those interested in progressive 
constitution making can give atten- 
tion to. 

The foundations of constitution mak- 
ing will be stirred as never before in 
the history of this country. We mean 
the foundations; and we mean the 
foundations of constitution making. 
Never has the line between constitution 
substance and statutory substance been 
adhered to. Will this be done in these 
three states in 1915? The constitutions 
of our states are filled with statutory 
substance. 

Strictly, a constitution should set 
forth the things which constitute the 
government. It is sometimes called the 
organic law — defining the organs of the 
government and their functions. A bill 
of rights has no proper place in a con- 
stitution, particularly in the constitutions 
of our states, backed up as they are 
by the Federal Constitution. 

The early fundamental laws of 
Europe were created and won in the 
struggle for civil liberty. We have our 
civil liberty. Our problem is to con- 
stitute the best possible machinery of 
government. "Constitute: to make up; 
to compose." — March. A constitution 
should establish the composition, the 
component parts, of a government, and 
define the functions of the parts. It 
should make the state into a govern- 
mental organism. It is frequently re- 
ferred to as a "frame of government"; 
but it is more. It sets forth the parts 
of the machine or organism and their 
functions. 



Laws are the products of the machine. 
The machine and its products should not 
be confused. They are sadly mixed in 
practically all of our state constitutions 
— some worse than others. Constitu- 
tional conventions have made laws as 
well as a machine to make laws, and 
constitutional amendments have been 
more frequently referred statutory mat- 
ter than additions to the governmental 
machine. To be organic, a thing must 
be an organ or a part of an organ in 
an organic whole. It cannot be like the 
product of the organism and be organic. 
It must be a part of the organism to be 
organic. 

A threshing machine is organic. 
Straw and wheat are its products. But 
men must raise the wheat before it can 
be threshed, and they must supply the 
power to the threshing machine before 
they can get the desired product. Men 
must establish a governmental machine 
which will produce the kind of govern- 
ment they want. They must see that 
it has power to run, and it must be 
under their control. If it does not 
produce the kind of laws they want, 
they must retain the right to correct 
their errors (Referendum) and supply 
their deficiencies (Initiative). But the 
machine should be made as near right 
as possible, so that it will make no 
errors and have no deficiencies. The 
constitution is the document that de- 
fines or describes and ordains the ma- 
chine. Laws are documents which are 
products of the machine — not the ma- 
chine itself, nor the document descrip- 
tive of the machine. The machine in 
operation does more than grind out 
laws. It executes laws and conducts 
many kinds of services. But the con- 
stitution only determines the constitu- 
ents of the machine and the functions 
of the constituents and hence of the 
machine. 

We hope that the coming constitu- 
tional conventions will confine them- 
selves to the creation of governmental - 



Equity 



machinery only. They should erect the 
best governmental machine possible, and 
then provide for the control of its parts 
(the Recall) and for the control of the 
machine itself (Initiative and Refer- 
endum). But if the machine is made 
right, there will be little or no occasion 
for the exercise of the I., R. and R. 

Statutes are one of the products of 
the machine — not a part of the ma- 
chine. Do not confuse the two. 

The future state governing machine 
will be much simpler than any we have 
yet seen, and it will be correspondingly 
more efficient. The constitution may 
have a brief preamble. It will perhaps 
give the boundaries of the state, but 
as they are established in the earliest 
charter, why repeat every time the ma- 
chine needs modernizing? There will 
be no bill or declaration of rights. We 
have won our rights long ago, and 
none dare challenge them. And they 
are safely lodged in the United States 
Constitution. 

Then there will be a plain recital 
of organs of government and their func- 
tions, without the ancient and discred- 
ited division, "executive, legislative and 
judicial." Perhaps there will be a gov- 
ernor, elected by the voters; or will 
there be a state manager, selected and 
controlled by the legislature? And will 
there be a legislature? or will there be 
a small body, selected from the state 
at large, which will have no specified 
"sessions," but be in service all the 
time? This small body could make laws 
deliberately, few but good, select and 
control the administrative officers and 
perhaps the judiciary — and no laws 
would ever be unconstitutional, for the 
constitution would set no boundary to the 
rights of the law-making power. The 
popular Referendum would be the only 
authority which could question any law 
promulgated by the representative body 
— called, perhaps, the Board of Gov- 
ernors. 

The above are just a few hints as to 



what state government is likely to be- 
come. Here in this country constitutions 
do not have to grow by a painful proc- 
ess during many generations, carrying 
with them many useless accretions long 
after their usefulness has disappeared. 
With us a city charter or a state con- 
stitution can be a new birth, not a long- 
drawn-out evolution. We are not 
chained to the past. We can incorporate 
the old lessons into the new and better 
forms, conserving the good and elimi- 
nating the worn out and useless. 

Will New York, in 1915, fulfill our 
hopes? New York lawyers are very 
prolix and verbose, and there are power- 
ful private interests in that great state 
that prefer past methods, because they 
know how to manipulate them to pri- 
vate advantage, and thus would fear a 
change. But, on the other hand, there 
are no better constructive and progress- 
ive brains anywhere than in New York 
State. The trouble is that they have 
such powerful interests to oppose. And 
the selection of delegates in New York 
will be political — they will be chosen 
by means of partisan ballots. 

South Dakota lead in the I. and R. 
movement. Will she retain her leader- 
ship by producing a model constitution 
in 1915 that the other states must fol- 
low? 

Indiana has not kept pace, politically, 
with the progressive states. Will she, 
in 1915, show her mettle by leaping to 
the front? She has carefully provided 
for nonpartisan election of delegates. 
This is a good start. Will she free her 
cities and towns, and establish a small, 
popularly elected body, a Board of Gov- 
ernors of say fifteen (one for each of 
the thirteen congressional districts and 
two at large), which will be the state 
government? This board could choose 
a governor or state manager, the neces- 
sary administrative officers and judici- 
ary, etc., and put the state government 
on the highest plane of simplicity and 
efficiency that we have yet seen. 



8 



Equity 



Constitutional Situation in Illinois. 

Let us look at the constitutional situ- 
ation in Illinois. To use an expression 
frequently used in that state, they are 
"bottled up," by a provision that only 
one article of the constitution can be 
amended at one election. The struggle 
of different factions for their particular 
amendment causes a "log jam" (another 
popular expression in Illinois in relation 
to the constitution) ; that is, many logs 
seeking to get through a narrow passage 
causes such a crowding that none can 
pass. So with the amendments. Only 
one can be submitted, and the conges- 
tion at that narrow outlet is so great 
that none get through. Last winter 
two propositions were offered for re- 
lief : one was a constitutional conven- 
tion, and the other was an amendment 
removing the above-mentioned restric- 
tion, so that after the adoption of this 
amendment numerous amendments might 
be submitted at the same election. 
Neither of these propositions was agreed 
to, and the "log jam" continues. There 
is much talk now of an extra session 
for the purpose of doing one of these 
two things. 

In this connection, let us look and 
see if there is any danger of a "log 
jam" in any other state. Mr. Arthur 
M. Evans has been making a study of 
this question for the Chicago Record- 
Herald, and from his article in that 
paper for December 17th we clip the 
following : 

We analyzed the limitations in the consti- 
tutions of other states in an article several 
weeks ago, but they are worth dwelling on 
again. Of the forty-eight commonwealths, 
Illinois is in a class by itself when it comes 
to narrow limits on constitutional changes. 
The great majority of the commonwealths are 
without limitations either as to number or 
frequency of amendments. When we cull out 
the states that have restrictions the number is 
astonishingly small. Here they are: 

Illinois — Not more than one article at a 
time, same article not oftener than once in 
four years. 

Kentucky — Not more than two amendments 
at a time. 



Arkansas, Kansas and Montana — Not more 
than three at a time. 

Colorado — Not more than six articles at a 
time by the legislature. No limit on number 
submitted by initiative petition. 

New Jersey and Pennsylvania — No amend- 
ment or amendments to be submitted oftener 
than once in five years. 

Tennessee — Not oftener than once in six 
years. 

Vermont — Not oftener than once in ten 
years. 

The remaining thirty-eight states impose no 
such restraint on the legislature or the voters. 
Of the ten states with restrictions, it will be 
noted, Illinois is held down the tightest. It 
is limited both in number and frequency. The 
other limited states have no such dual re- 
striction. 



State Legislatures. 

Did you ever see one in action? 
What did you think of it? We do not 
ask this question in derision, but we 
ask it seriously. Most of the members 
of the house are usually "first-termers," 
without legislative experience, and the 
majority of them serve only one term. 
The same principle is true of the sen- 
ate also, but not to the same extent, 
largely on account of a percentage of 
the senators in some states being "hold- 
overs." 

A large number of the state consti- 
tutions limit the length of legislative 
sessions, some making the limit as low 
as forty days, and as a rule only one 
session is held during a legislator's term 
of office. With these limitations as to 
time and experience, these men, who 
as a rule have had no preparation for 
their work as legislators, add about 
twenty-five thousand pages of 'law*' to 
our statute books every year! It was 
argued by some that it was unreason- 
able to expect the voters of Oregon to 
vote on thirty-two measures after they 
had had four months in which to study 
them, being furnished with a boc'< 
taining the text in full, and the text 
simplified, with arguments for and 
against many of them. How much more 
unreasonable is it to expect an un- 



Equity 



9 



trained legislator, many of them no bet- 
ter equipped for his duties than the 
average voter, to read, understand and 
vote upon an average of from ten to 
forty bills, resolutions, etc., per day, 
for from forty to one hundred and 
fifty days in succession? 

Our legislators are taken from various 
walks of life, without previous prepa- 
ration for or experience in law-making. 
Is it fair to expect them to be more 
than they are? They are, as a rule, 
honest men with the best intentions, 
men who have generally been successful 
in life and achieved prominence in their 
communities. But are they more than 
babes in the hands of scheming poli- 
ticians and adroit managers of great 
corporations? It is no disrespect to 
the average legislator to advocate a 
change which will put the people's in- 
terests in the charge of men as ex- 
perienced and as able as the enemies of 
the people. 

The fact is that about the first half 
or two-thirds of every session is taken 
up in organization, appointment of com- 
mittees and other formalities, with lit- 
tle or no legislation accomplished. 
Then as the end of the session ap- 
proaches there is law-making in hot 
haste — and our legislatures are called 
deliberative bodies ! In this "hot 
haste" many crudities and errors occur, 
as well as legislative crimes. For ex- 
amples of errors, Governor Hodges, of 
Kansas, says : 

"Notwithstanding the fact that my ex- 
ecutive clerk and the Attorney General 
did their best to scrutinize all the bills, 
chapters 177 and 178, and chapters 174 
and 175, respectively, are duplicates. 
Chapter 75 of the laws of 1911 was re- 
pealed three times — first by section 3 
of chapter 75 of the laws of 1913; by 
section 2 of chapter 123 of the laws 
of 1913, and then by section 7, chapter 
124 of the laws of 1913. Chapter 318 
of the laws of 1913 was immediately 
amended by chapter 319 of the laws 
of 1913. Chapter 82 of the laws of 
1911 was repealed by section 7 of chap- 
ter 89 of the laws of 1913, and after 



being repealed was then amended and 
repealed by chapter 108 of the laws 
of 1913. 

"I know of enactments upon the 
statute books, that after passing one 
branch of the legislature were objected 
out of an omnibus reading and roll call 
and were never voted on in the senate 
at all, but were shown afterwards by 
the Journal as having passed the sen- 
ate in the usual legal way. The 'omni- 
bus' method would be impossible with 
a single-house legislature of few mem- 
bers. 

"Much time was given to the passage 
of a bill relating to the practice of 
chiropractic — whatever that is. I let 
this bill become a law without my sig- 
nature, but on examination found that 
it required me to appoint as members 
of a board three chiropractors who had 
practiced their art in Kansas for two 
years past. In order to comply with 
this provision of the law, I would have 
been compelled to appoint men or 
women who had been openly violating 
the medical registration laws of our 
state for two years — a thing which, as 
Governor, I refused to do. 

"The law governing the inspection of 
hotels and lodging houses contains this 
provision : 'All carpets and equipment 
used in offices and sleeping rooms, in- 
cluding walls and ceilings, must be well 
plastered and be kept in a clean and 
sanitary condition at all times.' In 
this same enactment are three distinct, 
different and diametrically opposite sec- 
tions. No lawyer can possibly give a 
definite statement as to when the enact- 
ment becomes operative, and yet this 
bill was drawn in the origin by its 
friends and handled by them all through 
its process of enactment. 

"For six years there stood upon our 
statute book as a part of the law regu- 
lating automobile traffic on the public 
highways the following, which was 
doubtless added by some hilarious poli- 
tician who was impressed by the 'band- 
wagon' idea of party management : 

Nothing in this section shall be construed 
as in any way preventing, obstructing, imped- 
ing, embarrassing, or in any other manner or 
form infringing upon the prerogative of any 
political chauffeur to run an automobilious 
band-wagon at any rate he sees fit compatible 
with the safety of the occupants thereof; 
provided, however, that not less than ten nor 
more than twenty ropes be allowed at all 
times to trail behind this vehicle when in 



10 



Equity 



motion in order to permit those who have 
been so fortunate as to escape with their 
political lives, an opportunity to be dragged 
to death; and provided further, that when- 
ever a mangled and bleeding political corpse 
implores for mercy, the driver of the vehicle 
shall, in accordance with the provisions of 
this bill, "Throw out the life-line." 

"Here is another: 

If any stallion or jack escape from his owner 
by accident, he shall be liable for all damages, 
but shall not be liable to be fined as above 
provided. 

"By being somewhat heedless to the 
ordinary rules of grammar, some court 
might decide that it was the owner and 
not the stallion or jack who is made 
liable for damage under this act. An- 
other act that particularly shows the 
inefficiency of legislatures is the bill 
that had for its purpose the raising of 
convicts' wages to be paid to the de- 
pendent wife and children of men and 
women confined in the Kansas peni- 
tentiary. The bill was drawn by its 
friends and had for its purpose the in- 
creasing of the convicts' wages from 
three cents a day to thirteen cents a 
day, but so clumsily was it drawn and 
so ambiguous was its phraseology that 
only by a decided stretch of imagina- 
tion and feeling for the convicts by our 
Attorney-General were we permitted to 
continue to pay the convicts three cents 
a day, their former wages, much less 
give them the additional ten cents a 
day that the enactment contemplated. 
This evidences another reason why we 
should have men in our law-making de- 
partment who understand the how of 
things. 

"I am told that in the early days of 
Oklahoma, a compilation of the laws 
of this prairie state included a full set 
of regulations for the government of 
harbors, wharfage and lighthouses, 
taken bodily from the regulations en- 
acted by the Texas legislature for its 
Gulf ports. 

_ "Another law sent to my office for 
signature was found on examination to 
contain a negative which made the act 
exactly contrary to what it was in- 
tended to be. This bill was only one 
of fifteen others which were returned 
to the legislature by me for correction 
in particulars > more or less important. 
Two bills which were exact duplicates, 
each of the other, passed both houses 
and came to my desk before the dupli- 
cation was discovered. I am informed 



that exactly the same thing happened 
this year in Pennsylvania. And in one 
instance a bill was passed amending 
another act which had been passed some 
days previous, and both the original act 
and the amendment were enrolled and 
reached my office about the same time. 
A number of bills passed both houses 
without any enacting clauses — a matter 
absolutely requisite to their validity as 
laws, and in the session laws will be 
found a large number of resolutions 
authorizing corrections in a number of 
acts. 

"Notwithstanding the constitutional 
prohibition against special legislation, 
many acts were in fact special, although 
they have the form and appearance of 
being of general application. On the 
other hand, by reason of time taken up 
in discussing and passing worthless leg- 
islation, like the chiropractic bill and 
the 'pure-shoe' bill, legislation of the 
utmost importance was pushed over until 
the last days of the session, when there 
was no time for even a pretense of dis- 
cussion or deliberation, and accordingly 
failed of enactment. Among these im- 
portant measures was a grain inspec- 
tion bill, the Kincaide bridge bill, a 
collateral inheritance tax, a recording 
mortgage tax bill and a bill prohibit- 
ing the foreclosure of mortgages until 
the owner and holder should either pay 
or show that he had paid all taxes that 
might lawfully have been assessed 
against it from its date. 

"With all that, the Kansas legislature 
of 1913 was as efficient, as capable, as 
upright and honest as any legislature 
that ever sat ; it passed many whole- 
some laws. There was not a single 
suspicion of corruption. It was as good 
a legislature as can be gotten together 
under the bicameral system, but it re- 
quires much more than honesty to make 
laws for a state. Effective work in a 
legislature can only be done by a man 
of experience, notwithstanding the best 
of intentions." 

We have quoted thus freely from 
Governor Hodges because he has viewed 
this matter with open eyes and a 
scrutinizing mind. It is frequently 
argued against the Initiative that there 
is no opportunity to amend a prop- 
osition thus offered; that the voter 
must vote either for or against it as 
it is, without the possibility of changing 






Equity 



11 



it. This is really an argument in favor 
of the Initiative, for measures submit- 
ted in this way are free from the 
danger of injurious amendment. To 
quote Governor Hodges again: 

"I have seen bills carefully drawn by 
experts after months or perhaps years 
of the most painstaking and careful 
study of the subject, amended on the 
floor of both house and senate in a 
rapid-fire sort of way, by men who 
had never given an hour's consideration 
to the subject matter, and in the end 
have seen what might have been a 
useful law either weighted down with 
amendments which caused friends of 
the original bill to vote against it, or 
have seen the bill become a law so 
amended as to be unrecognizable by the 
man who introduced it, and its effective- 
ness frittered away because some sena- 
tor or representative possessed an in- 
ordinate desire to put himself in evi- 
dence, no matter how." 

People who know little or nothing 
about legislatures and their working 
methods think that our established plan 
for making laws is ideal. Those who 
have seen legislatures in operation and 
have had experience either in or with 
legislatures, know that the plan is not 
ideal. Without ridiculing nor condemn- 
ing the past, but being thankful that so 
imperfect a system has given as good 
results as it has, let us ask ourselves 
seriously if the plan cannot be im- 
proved. Let us ask in what ways can 
the present plan be improved. 

Perhaps all will agree that our plan 
would be improved by the legislatures 
being composed of fezver men, more 
carefully selected men, and men who 
have had some preparation for their 
work. 

Next, perhaps all will agree that the 
legislative sessions should be longer, 
possibly continuous. 

And why have two houses? Concen- 
trated responsibility with real deliber- 
ation will give much better results than 
the present plan. The idea that one 
house checks the short-comings of the 
other is largely fallacious. Bills are 



often passed by one house in order to 
put the duty and responsibility of their 
defeat on the other house. And, con- 
versely, it is the politician's dodge to 
pass a bill in his own house and boast 
of it to those whom he wishes to please 
but not serve, and work for the defeat 
of the same bill in the other house. 

We want legislatures of fewer mem- 
bers and better material. Does that 
look like a further removal from 
democracy? Could not wealthy and 
powerful corporations more easily cor- 
rupt and control a legislature of a 
single house and few members than one 
of two houses and many members? The 
answer to this is that with the demo- 
cratic trinity, Initiative, Referendum and 
Recall, which is a necessary part of the 
plan, we have a more perfect democracy 
than before, together ivith the skill and 
efficiency of trained legislators. With 
popular control over the legislators and 
their acts, the people's interests will be 
safe and well served. But with the 
concentrated responsibility will come 
greater care and faithfulness in law- 
making than ever before, and conse- 
quently there will be few, if any, oc- 
casions for the use of the I., R. or R. 
There will be no more such grists as 
two thousand or more laws in a single 
session, many of which are crude and 
most of which are unnecessary. In- 
stead there will be a few, very few, 
good laws issuing from a board of high 
ability in constant service, and only after 
full publicity of any contemplated law. 

Is not the day for the unicameral 
legislature coming? Governor Hodges 
is working for a legislature of a single 
house for Kansas, consisting of sixteen 
members — two from each congressional 
district. Kansas could well afford to 
pay $5,000 per year to each of such a 
body to make laws for Kansas, requir- 
ing continuous service instead of brief 
and limited sessions. This body would 
promulgate laws according to need, and 
only after mature deliberation and full 



12 



Equity 



publication in order to test the senti- 
ment of the state. One trial of this 
method, and one example of this kind of 
state law-making, would attract such 
attention that other states would soon 
follow, and in a few years we would 
wonder how we endured our present 
method so long. 

This subject will receive much at- 
tention in the constitutional conventions 
that are likely to be held in New York, 
Indiana, South Dakota and possibly 
some other states in 1915. 



Legislative Sessions During 1914. 

The following state legislatures will 
meet in 1914 on dates indicated below : 

Limit of 
Session. 

Georgia, June 24, 1914 50 days 

Kentucky, January 6, 1914 60 days 

Louisiana, May 18, 1914 60 days 

Maryland, January 7, 1914 90 days 

Massachusetts, January 7, 1914 None. 

Mississippi, January 6, 1914 None. 

New Jersey, January 13, 1914 None. 

New York, January 7, 1914 None. 

North Dakota, January 6, 1914 60 days 

Rhode Island, January 6, 1914 60 days 

South Carolina, January 13, 1914 None. 

Virginia, January 14, 1914 60 days 



Representation. 

Representation, to be true, must be 
complete; and, conversely, it must be 
complete to be true. Possibly this may 
not be clear. We will try to make it so. 

Borrowing Mr. C. G. Hoag's graphic 
illustration,* and slightly modifying it, 
please see the following diagram, each 
space representing a ward in a city : 

/23 4S6 7 8 



Here are fifteen wards. The shaded 
portions represent the majority in each 
ward which elected a councilman. The 
white space above represents the votes 
of the defeated candidate (or candi- 
dates) in each ward. It can easily be 
seen that the voters represented by the 
shaded portions are represented, and the 
voters represented by the white portions 
are not represented. The diagonal lines 
represent one party and the horizontal 
lines the other party — say the Republi- 
can and Democratic parties, respectively. 
But that makes no difference in the fact 
that in each of the fifteen wards there 
is a large minority not represented. 
This is our usual single-member district 
system of electing representatives to leg- 
islative bodies. A glance at the diagram 
shows its defects. It does not give com- 
plete representation, hence not true rep- 
resentation. 

When a community sees the imper- 
fections of this single-member district 
system it usually adopts the "general- 
ticket" plan; that is, districts are en- 
tirely disregarded, and the entire fifteen 
representatives are elected on a "general 
ticket" by the voters of the city as a 
whole, allowing each voter to vote for 
fifteen candidates, the highest fifteen 
being elected. This is known as the 
"bloc" vote, as each voter votes for a 
"bloc," or -block, of fifteen candidates. 
The theory is that the voters are thus 
not restricted to local candidates, and 
the best men of the city can be chosen 
without strict reference to the portion 
of the city in which they happen to 

9 /O // /2 /3 A* /£ 




^Used in Equity for January, 1913, page 75. 



reside. And it may be said that this 
system usually results in the choosing 



Equity 



13 



of a better class of representatives; but 
the following diagram shows that it is 
as far from giving complete represen- 
tation as the district plan, and it also 
has imperfections or dangers of its own : 



ted to vote for more than one? In the 
district plan, which is still in general 
use, the voter votes for only one can- 
didate for representative, but he is con- 
fined in his choice to the candidates in 




This diagram shows the voters of 
the same city, after an election in which 
fifteen representatives have been elected 
by the block system. Say the successful 
candidates received 55% of the votes 
(represented by the shaded portion of 
the diagram). We see that 45% of the 
voters, represented by the white por- 
tion, are not represented. Thus we see 
that our difficulty is not removed ; the 
representation is practically as incom- 
plete as before, with the added difficulty 
that a solid block of similarly minded 
voters, if in majority in the city as a 
whole, may elect the entire fifteen, while 
the district system usual'y gives variety 
in the composition of the representative 
body. If there is a party division, as 
unfortunately there usually is, the block 
system gives the majority party a de- 
cided advantage, as by a majority, how- 
ever slight, it may elect all the repre- 
sentatives, leaving the minority party 
entirely without representation. ' Thus 
this first plan usually adopted to im- 
prove representation utterly fails to 
solve the difficulty. 

The next plan in the evolution of this 
problem is the single-vote plan on a 
general ticket. In the district plan each 
voter can vote for only a single can- 
didate. When all the candidates for 
the entire city appear on a general 
ticket why should the voter be permit- 



his own ward or district. The single- 
vote general-ticket plan still confines him 
to one vote, but does not confine him 
to candidates from his own ward. This 
plan permits him to vote for any candi- 
date on the ticket, regardless of what por- 
tion of the city the favored candidate 
may live in. The fifteen candidates who 
have the highest vote are declared elected. 
Before we diagram the result of such 
an election, let us do some figuring. 
And for easy figuring, let us assume 
that 1,000 votes are cast in each of the 
15 wards. In the district plan, a ma- 
jority of the 1,000 votes (or a plurality, 
if more than two candidates are on 
the ward ballot) would elect. In the 
block plan, the 15 candidates who would 
get a majority (or plurality) of 15,000 
votes would be elected. But in the 
single-vote plan, candidates not being 
confined to single wards and every voter 
casting one vote for one candidate, but 
having all the candidates (for represen- 
tative) in the city (regardless of 
wards) to choose from, the resultant 
votes received by each candidate would 
be very unequal. It is conceivable that 
one very popular candidate might get 
10,000 or 12,000 of the 15,000 votes, and 
that the other 14 representatives would 
be chosen by a very small vote, some 
of them being elected by a very small 
vote, indeed. This is difficult to dia- 



14 



Equity 



gram, for such an election might result 
in so many different ways and still, by 
the plan of "the highest 15," 15 repre- 
sentatives would be elected, and one 
successful candidate might represent 
10.000 votes, and another successful 
candidate might not represent more 
than 100 votes. Such a possibility at 
once shows that the system has grave 
defects. But we will not diagram an 
extreme case. Let us try what might 
be considered an average result. To 



15,000 votes.* The simplest diagram- 
matic representation of these numbers is 
the following: The first diagram being 
drawn on the scale of one inch vertical 
measurement, representing 1,000 votes, 
this diagram, to represent a maximum 
of 4,000 votes, must be four inches in 
vertical measurement, in order to pre- 
serve harmony and consistency in these 
diagrams. Of course every reader 
knows that the purpose of diagrams is 
to simplify by an appeal to the eye. 




make it easy, we will assume 30 can- 
didates for the 15 places; 15,000 votes 
go to 30 candidates. Let us suppose 
that they are divided as follows: 4,000, 
3,000, 2,000, 1,000, 900, 800, 700, 600, 
500, 400, 300, 200, 100, 90, 80, 70, 60, 
50, 40, 30, 20, 15, 10, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2= 



*As a matter of fact, where this plan is 
used, as in Japan, the politicians are able to 
pre-calculate probable pollings with sufficient 
accuracy to prevent the wide inequalities here 
shown. But we want a system that will give 
full freedom to every voter, and render the 
intervention of politicians unnecessary and 
impossible. 



Equity 



15 



It is seen here that while the most 
popular candidates represent from 1,000 
to 4,000 votes, the lowest candidate goes 
in by an insignificant vote of 80. Here 
we reach the acme of unequal repre- 
sentation, but as we shall see, we are ap- 
proaching a solution of the problem. 

To go back to the district plan, we 
see that each candidate who receives a 
majority (or a plurality) of 1,000 votes 
is elected. And by the single-vote, 
general-ticket plan one successful can- 
didate gets 4,000 votes (plainly too 
many) and another successful candi- 
date gets 80 votes (plainly too few). 
We seem to be getting farther from the 
exact solution of true representation, but 
we are not, for this suggests a vital 
question, which is : How many votes 
should a candidate get to be successful 
in the case above treated? This we 
will see is a vital question. There are 
15 places to fill; so a candidate who 
can command 1/15 of the votes should 
be entitled to a place. If the votes 
could be equally divided, 1,000 to each 
of 15 popular candidates, this would be 
absolute perfection. But absolute per- 
fection is too much to expect in poli- 
tics. It would be impossible to get the 
voters to divide into 15 equal parts. 
If we can approach reasonably near this 
we will be thankful. 

Is there a way to distribute the ex- 
cess votes of the popular candidates 
who have more than they need for 
election? and is there a way, by such 
distribution, to build up the vote of 
other candidates so that an absolute test 
of popularity may be made? If so, these 
things are what we want. 

Happily, these questions can be an- 
swered in the affirmative. 

First we must agree upon a number 
of votes that will plainly justify elec- 
tion. We have seen above that to di- 
vide the total vote, 15,000, by 15, the 
number of places to be filled, would 
give too large a quotient. At this point 
please accept the rule that the experts 



have worked out, which is as follows: 
"The whole number of valid ballots shall 
then be divided by a number greater by 
one than the number of seats to be 
filled." Our total number of valid bal- 
lots is 15,000. The "number greater by 
one than the number of seats to be 
filled" is 16. Thus we divide 15,000 by 
16. This brings a quotient of 937^. 
The next rule recognized by experts is: 
"The next whole number larger than 
the quotient thus obtained shall be the 
quota or constituency." The next 
whole number is 938. It is evident that 
16 candidates could not get so many 
votes as 938 out of a total of 15,000 
votes. To prove this, multiply 938 by 
16 and the result is more than 15,000 — 
that is, more votes than we have. So 
15 candidates is the utmost number 
that can get 938 votes each out of a 
total of 15,000 votes. Any candidate 
who gets as many as 938 votes should 
be declared elected. Any system which 
will get 938 votes for each of 15 can- 
didates out of 15,000 votes will do all 
that is humanly possible to obtain full 
and accurate representation. No more 
than 15 candidates could possibly get 
so many as 938 votes out of a total of 
15,000 votes. Therefore we have here 
reached practical perfection. 

But how shall we distribute the votes 
so as to get 15 uniform constituencies 
of 938 votes each? By giving multiple 
choices to each voter, but counting each 
ballot only once. Each voter will mark 
his first choice 1, his second choice 2, 
third 3, etc., as far as he wishes to 
express his preferences. His first choice 
will be counted if needed to help elect 
his first choice, but if not, it will go to 
his second choice, or third, etc., ac- 
cording to need. The distinguishing 
feature of this plan is the transferring 
of ballots according to need. It is a 
single ballot, as each voter votes a bal- 
lot that can be counted for only one 
candidate. The multiple-choice feature 
makes it possible to transfer the count 



16 



Equity 



according to the need of the earliest 
choice specified, 

Now let us go back to the last dia- 
gram. The first candidate there noted, 
who received 4,000 votes, we will call 
A. But we will not count 4,000 votes 
for him, because as soon as he has re- 
ceived 938 first-choice ballots he will 
be declared elected, and no more votes 
will be counted for him, as they could 
do him no good. So, after that point 
in the counting has been reached, bal- 
lots declaring first choice for A. are 
counted for the second choice specified. 
If the second choice there specified has 
also had as many as 938 votes counted 
for him, and therefore has been declared 
elected, the third choice is counted. 
Thus by counting votes only according 
to need of the candidates in the order 
of specification, surplus votes are dis- 
tributed; and as fast as candidates re- 
ceive a full quota of votes, in this in- 
stance 938, they are declared elected and 
are retired from the running. 

If the surplus votes do not give so 
many as 938 votes to each of 15 candi- 
dates, then what shall we do? The 
only thing left to do is to sacrifice the 
candidate lowest on the list (he is 
already defeated) and use the subse- 
quent choices of his supporters to build 
up other quotas or constituencies. Thus 
the voters who preferred the least popu- 
lar candidate do not lose their votes, 
for their earliest available subsequent 
choice is counted. And this process is 
continued until 15 constituencies of 938 
votes each are built up. And no more 
than this is possible in this case. The 
freest possible choices have been given, 
and all the possibilities have been ex- 
hausted. This is our nearest possible 
approach to perfection. The excess 
votes of the popular candidates have 
been used, and those who voted for the 
unpopular candidates "came in" by 
transferring their votes to their sub- 
sequent choices. 
However, the transferring is done, not 



at the precincts, but at a central point 
to which all the ballots are sent. At 
the precincts the first choices are 
counted and tabulated, and this tabu- 
lated count may be given out for pub- 
lication if desired. The ballots, sepa- 
rated as to first choices, are then sent 
with the tabulated first-choice count to 
the central point, where all the trans- 
ferring is done by experts, but their 
operations are open to the public. A 
representative of each candidate is 
usually invited to participate in the 
count, temporarily taking charge of all 
ballots counted for said candidate. The 
count is made aloud, and any who may 
wish in addition to the official tally 
keepers may keep tally, which is inter- 
esting and easy. 

This is called the Single Transfer- 
able Vote. This is the plan which gives 
the most complete and the most accurate 
representation possible. It is sometimes 
called the "Hare Ballot," for the name 
of its inventor. Its merits in choosing 
a representative body for a multiple dis- 
trict have been recognized by every 
student and investigator who has gone 
into the subject. It is in successful use 
in various parts of the world, but no- 
where, as yet, in our great and sup- 
posedly progressive country. On its 
merits, it is destined to find universal 
adoption. 

This plan is sometimes called Propor- 
tional Representation because it will 
give representation to parties in pro- 
portion to their numerical strength, if 
the voters wish to cast a partisan vote. 
But in cities, where personal merit is 
uppermost in the minds of the voters 
rather than partisan considerations, it 
gives an effective ballot — the effect of 
practically every voter's wish is felt in 
the count. 

Some say it is hard to understand. 
On the contrary, it is plain and easy to 
one who will think. And the voter 
need not think any further than to ex- 
press his choices by numbers, as 1, 2, 3, 






Equity 



17 



etc., as far as he wants to go, to the 
end of the ballot if he desires. Only 
one choice is counted, and that exactly 
where it will best express his wish under 
the circumstances as they develop in 
the count. All the intricacies and com- 
plications fall upon the counters, who 
are supposed to need some technical 
skill to conduct such a count. But ex- 
perience has shown that the supposed 
intricacies clear away like the mist be- 
fore the rising sun. It is necessary 
only to follow plain and simple rules, 
which are established and well known, 
and experience has shown that they are 
very easy to follow. 

The imperfections of the district sys- 
tem, the block vote and the single vote 
are all solved by the single transferable 
vote. 



A Sample "Gateway" Amendment. 

Chapter VIII of the constitution of 
the Commonwealth of Australia, en- 
titled "Alteration of the Constitution," 
might make a pretty good model for a 
"gateway" amendment to our own 
national constitution — that is, an amend- 
ment to provide for the easier amend- 
ing of our Constitution. It is as fol- 
lows: 

128. This Constitution shall not be altered 
except in the following manner: 

The proposed law for the alteration thereof 
must be passed by an absolute majority of 
each House of the Parliament, and not less 
than two nor more than six months after its 
passage through both Houses the proposed law 
shall be submitted in each State to the electors 
qualified to vote for the election of members 
of the House of Representatives. 

But if either House passes any such pro- 
posed law by an absolute majority, and the 
other House rejects or fails to pass it or 
passes it with any amendment to which the 
first-mentioned House will not agree, and if 
after an interval of three months the first- 
mentioned House in the same or the next ses- 
sion again passes the proposed law by an ab- 
solute majority with or without any amend- 
ment which has been made or agreed to by 
the other House, and such other House rejects 
or fails to pass it or passes it with any amend- 
ment to which the first-mentioned House will 



not agree, the Governor-General may submit 
the proposed law as last proposed by the first' 
mentioned House, and either with or without 
any amendments subsequently agreed to by 
both Houses, to the electors in each State 
qualified to vote for the election of the House 
of Representatives. 

When a proposed law is submitted to the 
electors the vote shall be taken in such man- 
ner as the Parliament prescribes. But until 
the qualification of electors of members of the 
House of Representatives becomes uniform 
throughout the Commonwealth, only one-half 
the electors voting for and against the pro- 
posed lazv shall be counted in any State in 
which adult suffrage prevails. 

And if in a majority of the States a ma- 
jority of the electors voting approve the pro- 
posed law, and if a majority of all the electors 
voting also approve the proposed law, it shall 
be presented to the Governor-General for the 
Queen's assent. 

No alteration diminishing the proportionate 
representation of any State in either House of 
the Parliament, or the minimum number of 
representatives of a State in the House of 
Representatives, or increasing, diminishing, or 
otherwise altering the limits of the State, or 
in any manner affecting the provisions of the 
Constitution in relation thereto shall become 
law unless the majority of the electors voting 
in that State approve the proposed law. 

The Australian constitution passed the 
British Parliament and received the 
royal assent July 3, 1900. It will be 
seen that a majority of each house may 
at any time submit a constitutional 
amendment to popular vote ; and a ma- 
jority of the electors voting on the 
proposition is meant to decide, for the 
context shows that special elections are 
understood to be held to decide such 
propositions. And please note that an 
amendment to the Australian constitu- 
tion can be gotten in six months or less. 
A comparison of the above, with the 
great difficulty and long time required 
to amend our own constitution, suggests 
that we may well learn a lesson from 
the southern seas. 

If objection should be made that care 
should be taken not to make the process 
of amendment too easy, because of 
danger of abuse, the reply is the fol- 
lowing . 

The above was copied from "Mod- 



18 



Equity 



ern Constitutions," a book in two vol- 
umes, by W. F. Dodd, published by the 
University of Chicago. The edition 
copied from is marked, "Second impres- 
sion, March, 1912." And this edition 
does not show any amendment to have 
been made to the Australian constitu- 
tion, nor have we heard of any since 
March, 1912. So it seems that this pro- 
vision for amendment has not proved 
to be dangerous to the Australian con- 
stitution, and it is reasonable to suppose 
that a provision added to our national 
constitution of similar nature, but with 
obvious modifications, would not prove 
dangerous to our constitution nor to the 
stability of our government. 



Other "Gateway" Proposals. 
In previous issues we have presented 
and commented upon the La Follette 
"gateway" amendment. Two others 
have been introduced into the Senate 
that are worthy of presentation in this 
connection. 

April 15, 1913, Senator Owen, of Okla- 
homa, introduced the following Joint 
Resolution in the Senate: 

Joint Resolution. 
Proposing a method of amending the 
Constitution of the United States by 
establishing constitutional majority 
rule. 

Resolved by the Senate and House of 
Representatives of the United States of 
America in Congress assembled {two- 
thirds of the Senate and House of Rep- 
resentatives and three-fourths of the 
States concurring), That Article V of 
the Constitution shall be amended so as 
to read: 

"This Constitution may be amended in 
the following manner and in no other 
way: An amendment or amendments 
or the calling of a constitutional conven- 
tion may be proposed — 

"By a majority vote of the Members 
enrolled in each House of Congress. 
"By either House should the other 



House twice reject the proposal, and a 
failure for three months to act favorably 
shall constitute a rejection. 

"Congress shall propose an amend- 
ment or amendments or the calling of a 
constitutional convention when requested 
by a majority of the State legislatures. 

"Congress or either House may sub- 
mit competing measures. 

"Proposed amendments shall be trans- 
mitted by the Secretary of State to the 
secretaries of state of the several States 
of the Union for submission to such of 
the voters of the several States as are 
qualified to vote for the election of 
Members of the House of Representa- 
tives. To each voter there shall be 
mailed a copy of the proposals and a 
copy of the arguments, for and against, 
prepared by two committees composed 
of leading representatives of the oppos- 
ing sides; and the entire expense shall 
be borne by the Government of the 
United States. Not less than two nor 
more than four months shall elapse be- 
tween the time of issuing the voters' 
pamphlet and the date of the referen- 
dum vote. 

"The returns shall be transmitted to 
the House of Representatives, and the 
will of a double majority shall prevail — 
a majority of those who vote on the 
measure in a majority of the congres- 
sional districts and a majority of all the 
votes cast thereon: Provided, however, 
That no State without its consent, shall 
be deprived of its equal suffrage in the 
Senate." 



April 24, 1913, Senator Cummins, of 
Iowa, introduced the following in the 
Senate : 

Joint Resolution. 

Proposing an amendment to the Con- 
stitution of the United States. 
Resolved by the Senate and House of 
Representatives of the United States of 
America in Congress assembled (tzco- 
thirds of each House concurring 



Equity 



19 



therein), That an amendment to the 
Constitution of the United States, con- 
sisting of a new article, is hereby pro- 
posed, as follows, to wit: 

In addition to the provision of Article 
V of the Constitution of the United 
States for the amendment thereof it may 
be amended as follows, to wit: 

"Whenever the legislatures of sixteen 
States shall adopt resolutions proposing 
any amendment and the same are certi- 
fied to the President of the United 
States, or whenever fifteen per centum 
of the voters in twenty-four States pre- 
sent to the President petitions authenti- 
cated by the respective governors of the 
said States proposing any amendment, 
the President shall submit the same to 
the several States, and in either case any 
such amendment shall be valid to all in- 
tents and purposes as a part of the Con- 
stitution when ratified by two-thirds of 
the several States acting either by direct 
vote of the people or by the legislatures 
as may be determined by State law : 
Provided, That no State, without its con- 
sent, shall be deprived of its equal suf- 
frage in the Senate." 



Preferential Voting in Currency Law. 

A practical application of the principle 
of preferential voting is now brought to 
public attention, impressively and on 
very high legislative authority, in connec- 
tion with the new currency law. In defin- 
ing the process of electing the directors 
of Class A and Class B of the author- 
ized Federal reserve banks, the act, un- 
der Section 4, explains that the directors 
of each member bank shall elect by bal- 
lot a "district reserve elector" and also 
shall nominate one candidate for Class 
A and one candidate for Class B. The 
list of persons thus nominated are, after 
fifteen days, to be furnished to each 
elector. The next step is defined in the 
law in this language : 

"Every elector shall, within fifteen 
days after the receipt of said list, cer- 
tify to the chairman his first, second 



and other choices of a director of Class 
A and Class B, respectively, upon a pref- 
erential ballot, on a form furnished by 
the Board of Directors of the Federal 
reserve bank of the district. Each 
elector shall make a cross opposite the 
name of his first, second and other 
choices for a director of Class A and 
for a director of Class B, but shall not 
vote more than one choice for any one 
candidate." 

The act then declares that "any can- 
didate having a majority of all votes 
cast in the column of first choice shall 
be declared elected" and, if no one has 
a majority in that column, "then there 
shall be added together the votes cast 
by the electors for such candidates in the 
second column and the votes cast for 
the several candidates in the first col- 
umn." If then any candidate is found 
to have a majority he shall be declared 
elected, but if not, then similarly the 
votes cast in the third column shall be 
added in with the two others and the 
one having the highest number in this 
total shall be declared elected. 



Have not state legislatures, as we have 
come to know them, had their day? Have they 
not been tried and, under modern conditions, 
found wanting? Look at the legislature in 
New York state, in Texas, in Oklahoma, and, 
most significant example of all — Tennessee! All 
discredited at the present time and a score of 
others at various times have come under the 
contempt and derision of the public for their 
acts of commission and omission. 

The ostensible purpose of the legislature is 
the enactment of laws — and we have too many 
laws now! The laws essential to the peace 
and order of the state were written in the 
constitution or the statutes long, long ago. 
Whatever of new legislation is needed is 
merely of an administrative character based on 
the fundamental principles already on the 
books. A small number of men of high char- 
acter could much more economically transact 
the business of the state than can the cumber- 
some legislative assembly, the time of whose 
members, nowadays, is devoted to brawls with 
the executive and scrambles between themselves 
for political preferment. — Fort Smith (Ark.) 
Times-Record for Oct. 3, 1913- 



Equity for last January (1913) was a propa- 
ganda number, extra large — 80 pages and cover. 
It treats all the new processes of government 
in the simplest manner possible. Just the thing 
for beginners, or to show writers and speakers 
how to reach the understanding of beginners. 
These can still be supplied at 6*Ac. per copy 
by mail, and at lower prices in quantities. 



DIRECT LEGISLATION RECORD. 

[Including The Referendum News, formerly published at Washington, D. C] 



The Progressive Party and the I., It. 
and R. 

The Progressive party has people in 
it who believe in work; and they do 
not get tired of work. It has fre- 
quently been said that the reason that 
politicians get ahead of reformers is 
that the latter work spasmodically, 
while the politician begins to work for 
the next election as soon as the pre- 
ceding election is over, and he works 
night and day when necessary. The 
Progressive enthusiasts are the equal of 
the politicians in persistency, and this 
remarkable young party has called into 
its service not only enthusiasm but good 
brains. Another comparison to the ad- 
vantage of the Progressives is that they 
are working for real progress; the 
politicians work for office. 

The Progressive National Committee 
has established a Bureau of Education 
of the Progressive National Service at 
Forty-second Street Building, New York 
City, from which "Progressive Service 
Documents" are issued. The document 
"D 9" consists of 

Questions Submitted by the Department 
of Popular Government of the Pro- 
gressive National Service in Re- 
gard to the Initiative, the 
Referendum, the Recall 
of Judicial Decisions, 
and the Recall 
of Public 
Officers. 

These questions were submitted to the 
Editor of this magazine, and he gave 
careful replies to each question. Per- 
haps the questions and replies should be 
presented here, to show the searching 
nature of the questions, and the replies, 
concerning which there may be differ- 
ences of opinion, and if so a frank ex- 



pression of such differences are invited, 
for possible publication in next issue. 

Questions in Regard to the Initiative, 
the Referendum and the Recall, 
With Answers. 

I. The Initiative, 
j. In the states, should the initiative 
on constitutional amendments be differ- 
entiated from the initiative on legis- 
lation ? If so, in what manner? 

1. Many thinkers say "yes," perhaps 
because of the supposed "sacredness" 
of constitutions. Most radicals say 
"no" decidedly, believing that laws and 
constitutions should be equally "sa- 
cred" or not sacred; that what the peo- 
ple see fit -to do, they should be enabled 
to do, and extraordinary difficulties 
should not be put in their way. I am 
not dogmatic on this question. I would 
not seriously object if amendments be 
made slightly more difficult to present, 
but the difference should not be great. 

2. In cities, should the initiative on 
charter amendments be differentiated 
from the initiative on ordinances ? If so, 
in what manner? 

2. Same reply as to No. 1. 

3. Should initiative petitions require an 
absolute number of signers or a per- 
centage of the total number of voters? 

If the former, how should the number 
be fixed? 

If the latter, how should the total 
number of voters be determined and 
what should the percentage be? 

3. A definite number. There are 
many good reasons for this. But in 
the course of time, in a growing com- 
munity, the number might be changed. 
Say in a generation. 

There can be no positive rule. Judg- 
ment and experience are the only 
guides. The number should be suf- 
ficiently high to discourage triflers and 



Direct Legislation Record 



21 



disturbers, but not so great as to unduly 
burden reasonable and sincere up- 
builders of the common good. 

By the vote for governor in a state, 
or for mayor in a city; or in a com- 
mission governed city, the vote for the 
officer or officers that will best indi- 
cate the normal vote. The proper per- 
centage for the initiative is considered 
to be from 5% to 8% for a state, 10% 
for a large city, and 12% for a small 
city. 

4. Should it be required that the sign- 
ers of initiative petitions be distributed 
among different subdivisions of the po- 
litical unit, such as counties, districts or 
wards? If so, in what manner? 

4. Moderately only, if at all. It is 
argued that a voter's signature should 
count, regardless of the section of the 
state or city in which he lives. But 
there is some reason in the demand that 
a single locality shall not be able to 
precipitate questions upon an entire 
state or city without limit. The de- 
mand that initiative petitions shall come 
from say three congressional districts 
in moderate percentage in an average- 
sized state, or similarly, from say three 
wards in a city, is not unreasonable ; 
but that they shall come in full per- 
centage from half the counties in a 
state, as is required in Ohio, is very 
unreasonable — too great a hardship. 

5. Hoiv long before election should the 
petitions be filed? 

5. The "orthodox" minimum in states 
is four months — in order to allow time 
to ; print and distribute an official 
pamphlet containing the issues submit- 
ted and discussions of the same in 
time to allow deliberate study of them 
by the voters before the election. In 
cities, the time allowed is usually thirty 
days, and this seems to be sufficient 
and satisfactory. 

6. How should initiative petitions be 
signed and verified? 

Should payment for services in secur- 
ing signatures be prohibited? 



6. The customary way is to require 
signature of name and address in the 
presence of the solicitor, and require 
an affidavit of the solicitor on each 
paper as to the genuineness of the sig- 
natures on said paper. The openness 
of this method precludes fraud with- 
out easy detection. There is a grow- 
ing tendency to require thart signers 
be registered voters where registration 
is required as a qualification for voting. 

No. In this busy age of speciali- 
zation it is found best to pay even 
Sunday-school teachers in order to in- 
sure regular and efficient attention to 
duties and consequent success of the 
work. Voluntary services are found to 
be a frail reed to depend upon in any 
undertaking. Hence to prohibit pay- 
ment for services in securing signatures 
would greatly cripple the initiative. 

7. What provision should be made for 
special elections and should there be any 
absolute limit upon the frequency of 
special elections? 

If so, what limitation would you sug- 
gest? 

7. Special state elections are seldom 
if ever involved by the initiative. I 
cannot bring to mind a single one 
(unless it be in Oklahoma, where spe- 
cial technical reasons exist, to explain 
which would require too much space 
here). All the state constitutional 
amendments granting the initiative that 
I am familiar with, and I think I am 
familiar with all of them, provide for 
the submission of initiative measures 
at the next general election. 

But in the local use of the initiative 
in cities, special elections may be and 
sometimes are called, the condition for 
such being the requirement of a greater 
number of signatures on the petition 
than for submission at a general elec- 
tion. This extra requirement, it seems 
to me, is a sufficient limit to the fre- 
quency of special elections. I know of 
no case in which this has failed. Per- 
sonally, I do not favor special elections 



22 



Equity 



except under very unusual conditions. 
To set an arbitrary limitation, I would 
suggest that special elections shall not 
occur more often than every six 
months, though I would hope and expect 
that they would not occur near that 
often — that they be very unusual and 
infrequent. 

8. Should there be any limitation on 
the number of questions that may be 
submitted by the initiative at the same 
election? If so, what limitation or basis 
of limitation would you suggest? 

8. No. I believe that the needs of 
the people, as the people see them, are 
sufficient limitation. There should be 
no arbitrary limit. 

p. Should any subjects be excluded 
from the initiative? 

9. I can think of none — have never 
heard of any. 

io. Should the initiative be limited to 
proposals already introduced in the leg- 
islative body? 

10. I do not see why such limitation 
should be imposed. 

ii. Should there be any limitation 
upon the frequency of submission of the 
same question by the initiative? 

11. Here I differ from most of my 
friends who have been zealous workers 
for the initiative. I believe that after 
the voters have settled a question by 
direct vote, it should remain settled for 
a reasonable period — say for about four 
years. 

12. Should provision be made for the 
drafting of initiative measures by a 
permanent public bureau or official, on 
request? 

12. Such provision would be desir- 
able, with the clear provision that the 
services be rendered "on request" only. 

13. Should initiative measures require 
certification as to form by the govern- 
ment's legal adviser, by a court, by an 
expert commission, or in any way, be- 
fore they are entitled to go upon the 
ballot? 



13. No. See answer to preceding 
question. 

14. Who should determine the ballot 
titles for initiative measures? 

14. This duty is usually given to the 
Secretary of State, and that official has 
usually performed this service satis- 
factorily as far as I know. Some have 
favored that the Attorney-General per- 
form this service, or at least be con- 
sulted. But there should be a way 
provided to prevent an unfair presen- 
tation of a measure on the ballot. I 
suggest that upon complaint by the 
sponsors of an initiative measure, the 
ballot title be referred to a court, or 
to the Chief Justice of the Supreme 
Court. 

15. What means of publicity should be 
provided as to initiative measures: 

(z.) Publication in the newspapers? 

(2) Publication in a voters' handbook? 

(3) Presentation of arguments pro 
and con? 

If arguments are presented, by whom 
should they be prepared, and what limi- 
tations should be placed upon them? 

15. (1) No. However, this might 
suffice for local initiative measures. 

(2) Yes. Particularly for state initi- 
ative measures. 

(3) Yes. 

Affirmative, by the sponsors of the 
measure or by experts or counsel 
chosen by them. Negative, by any who 
wish to oppose, but anonymous argu- 
ments should never be admitted. If 
by counsel, the persons or interests for 
whom counsel is acting should be pub- 
lished with the argument. A definite 
amount, say 1,000 words for each side, 
should be admitted free — at public ex- 
pense. Additional space without limit 
at a uniform charge to all, to be made 
according to law or by the Secretary of 
State. 

16. How many voters should be re- 
quired to pass an initiative measure: 

(i.) A majority of the votes cast on 
the measure itself? 



Direct Legislation Record 



23 



(2) A majority of the votes cast at 
the election? 

(3) A majority of the registered 
voters? 

(4) A majority of the votes cast on 
the question, but not less than a certain 
fixed number or a certain percentage of 
the electorate? 

(5) Have you any other suggestion on 
this point? 

16. (1) Yes. 

(2) No. 

(3) No. 

(4) No. 

(5) I wish to emphasize my affirm- 
ative answer to (1), and my negative 
answers to (2), (3) and (4). When 
the door of opportunity to vote for 
or against a measure is wide open, fail- 
ure to vote should count for nothing. 
Such failure to vote on a measure be- 
trays either ignorance or indifference, 
neither of which should be allowed to 
count in any degree against a measure. 

17. Should the executive have a sus- 
pensive veto on initiative measures not 
adopted on first submission by a majority 
of the registered electorate? If so, how 
would you work it out? 

17. No. See reply to previous ques- 
tion (16). 

18. How should initiative measures be 
amended or repealed? 

18. 1. By direct vote of the voters. 
2. By the legislature, but more than 

a majority vote should be required; 
say two-thirds of the entire member- 
ship of each house. 

19. Should initiative measures be sub- 
mitted to the legislative body before 
being submitted to the people? 

If so, should the legislature have any 
power to alter them? 

Should the legislature be authorised 
to submit alternative measures along 
with measures initiated by petition? 

If alternative measures are submitted, 
what suggestions have you to make as 
to form of ballot and determination of 
the result? 



19. Not necessarily. 

No, except such alteration be sub- 
mitted alternatively. 

Yes. 

1. Shall either of the following meas- 
ures become law? [yes] ]no] 

[In the event that the question im- 
mediately above shall be decided af- 
firmatively, state your choice between 
the following two questions by a cross 
in the corresponding square.] 

1 .♦[ ] 

2 [ ] 

20. Should initiative measures ap- 
proved at one election be submitted to 
the legislature for ratification, and if 
not ratified be submitted to the people a 
second time before going into effect? 

20. No. Foririal approval of the 
voters by ballot should make law. And 
one such formal approval should be 
highly sufficient, without review by the 
legislature. 

21. In case conflicting measures are 
adopted, how shall the law be de- 
termined? 

21. By the largest majority — the 
measure commanding the largest ma- 
jority should be considered law above 
a conflicting measure commanding a 
less majority. But no such situation 
will arise except by very awkward ar- 
rangement of the ballot — conflicting 
measures should not be submitted. 

22. Is the advisory initiative on gen- 
eral questions of policy valuable as an 
adjunct to the regular initiative or as a 
substitute for it? 

22. No. A vote on a measure should 
be authoritative, and not merely ad- 
visory. 

23. Where the recall is in force as to 
the policy determining officers of a city 
government, is the advisory initiative and 
referendum on questions of policy a suf- 
ficient further measure of popular con- 
trol over municipal policies? 

23. Experience has abundantly proved 
that the "advisory" initiative and 



24 



Equity 



referendum are spurious. Workers for 
the initiative and referendum have no 
patience with the "advisory" variety. 
They strive only for the real thing. 

24. What have you to say as to the de- 
sirability of the active agitation of the 
initiative, the referendum and the recall 
as principal Progressive party measures 
in your community at this time? 

24. Desirable in all American com- 
munities at all times by all parties, until 
fully achieved. 

II. The Referendum. 

1. Upon wlwt subjects, if any, should 
th-e referendum be compulsory? 

1. Franchises and bond issues. On all 
other subjects the referendum should 
be optional, determined by demand of 
the voters according to law. In some 
states the location of state capital is 
a question to be settled only by referen- 
dum vote, and in some states and com- 
munities, financial proposals other than 
bond issues must be decided by direct 
vote. But if there is provision that a 
referendum must be had on demand, 
and if the conditions for the demand 
are not too difficult, I think that the last- 
mentioned questions need not be sub- 
mitted to a referendum vote unless a de- 
mand is made. 

2. Should the legislative body have the 
right in its discretion to submit measures 
to the referendum for final approval? 

2. I think so. The only objection is 
the possibility that a legislature may 
refer many measures with the object of 
bringing the referendum into disrepute. 
Let us hope that this possibility is re- 
mote. Formerly the courts were in- 
clined to consider it unconstitutional for 
a legislature to thus delegate its power. 
There are decisions to this effect in Del., 
Iowa, Mass., N. H. and N. Y. There 
are opposite decisions in Vt. and Wis. 
Not adjudicated, but dicta indicating 
such references to be unconstitutional, 
in Md., N. J., Tenn., Utah and Wash. 
The opposite in Ala., Ark., Col., Ga., 111., 



Kan., Minn., Miss., N. C, Pa., R. I., 
S. C. and W. Va. 

Such reference is expressly prohibited 
in the constitutions of Ind. and Ky. ; and 
expressly permitted by the constitutions 
of Ariz., Ark., Colo., Me., Mich., Mo., 
Mont., Okla., Ore., Wash., and since the 
election in Nov., 1913, we can add Mass. 
to this list. (See page 34.) 

3. Should the legislative body have the 
right to submit questions of general 
policy to an advisory referendum? 

3. I do not believe in an advisory 
referendum. Every referendum should 
mean business and be authoritative. 

4. Should the executive have the right 
to submit to a referendum measures ap- 
proved by the legislative body? 

4. I have never known this to be dis- 
cussed nor seriously considered. I see 
no objection to it. 

5. Should the executive have the right 
to submit to a referendum measures 
which the legislative body has refused 
to adopt? 

5. I would repeat here my answer to 
the preceding question, except that I 
would favor it rather more strongly. 
I know of no place where either of 
these is in operation. 

6. Should a minority of the members 
have the right to submit to a referendum 
measures passed by a legislative body? 

If so, how small a minority? 

6. I think so. 
Say about 15%. 

7. Should a minority of the members 
have the right to submit to a referendum 
measures which a legislative body has 
refused to pass? 

If so, how small a minority? 

7. I think so. 
Say about 15%. 

[The above four questions are new 
in the realm of discussion of this gen- 
eral subject, as far as I am aware. I 
know of no place in which they have 
ever been in operation. We seem to 
have no experience to guide us.] 

8. Should referendum petitions require 






Direct Legislation Record 



25 



the signature of an absolute number or 
of a percentage of the voters? 
If the latter, what percentage? 

8. See answer to 3, under "Initiative." 
5% for state and 10% for city 

referendum. Experience has proved 
these percentages to be about right. 
They have become in a manner "ortho- 
dox." However, I prefer a definite 
number. 

g. How long should measures be sus- 
pended after their passage to give an 
opportunity for the filing of referendum 
petitions? 

9. Ninety days for state and 30 days 
or possibly less for city. The former 
has become "orthodox." The time of 
suspension for the local referendum has 
not become so uniform. 

io. Should it be required that the sign- 
ers of a referendum petition be distrib- 
uted among different subdivisions of the 
political unit, as counties, districts or 
wards? 

If so, in what manner? 

10. See my answer to 4, under "Initi- 
ative." 

ii. In what manner should referendum 
petitions be signed and verified? 

Should payment for services in secur- 
ing signatures be prohibited? 

11. See my answer to 6, under "Initi- 
ative." 

12. What provision should be made for 
special elections when referendum pe- 
titions are filed? 

Should the calling of a special election 
be optional with the executive? 

12. See my answer to 7, under "Initi- 
ative." 

In state matters, I think not. Let the 
demand, if desired, come from the 
voters, a larger number of referendum 
signatures being required for a special 
election than for a regular election. The 
same principles should apply to the 
local referendum. Emergency con- 
ditions might occasionally justify a de- 
mand by the voters for a special state 
election, but it never has been done, and 



the I. and R. constitutional amendments 
do not provide for demand by the 
voters for a special state election. 

13. Should measures against which 
referendum petitions are filed be sus- 
pended until approved by the people? 

Should they go into effect and be re- 
pealed in case of an adverse vote? 

13. Yes, unless they are passed as 
emergency measures. 

No, unless passed as emergency meas- 
ures. 

14. What provision should be made for 
the exemption of emergency measures 
from the referendum? 

Should emergency measures be sub- 
ject to repeal upon a referendum? 

14. Emergency should be declared and 
explained in one paragraph of the meas- 
ure, which should be submitted sepa- 
rately, and a three-fourths vote of each 
house should be required to adopt it. 

Yes. 

15. How far should referendum powers 
extend to specific sections or items of 
legislative measures? 

15. Should be applicable to any spe- 
cific section or sections, item or items. 

16. How large a vote at a referendum 
election should be required to reject a 
measure? 

16. Majority of the vote cast thereon. 

17. How should measures approved by 
the people on referendum be amended 
or repealed? 

17. In the ordinary way. In this con- 
nection, see my answer to 18, under 
"Initiative," and note difference. In 
that case the voters and the legislature 
were at variance; hence my reply there. 
In the above case the voters and the 
legislature are proven to be in accord. 
Therefore the legislature should have 
the usual right to amend or repeal. 
But when there is a conflict between 
the legislators and the voters, the lat- 
ter should be supreme and their work 
should be specially safeguarded. 

18. In cities should the right of refer- 
endum be applicable to public contracts? 



26 



Equity 



If so, should there be any limitation 
based upon the financial importance of 
the contracts? 

18. Yes. 

I suppose so; but it is not likely that 
contracts involving trifling amounts 
would be brought to a referendum. 

ig. Should the principle of the refer- 
endum be extended so as to allow the 
people to veto particular appointments 
to important administrative offices, as, 
for example, the mayor's appointment of 
a police commissioner or the governor's 
appointment of a public service commis- 
sioner? 

If so, what offices should be subject to 
the referendum? 

What procedure would you suggest? 

19. That would be a justifiable ex- 
tension of the people's power. 

Only prominent ones. But it is not 
likely that minor appointments would 
be seriously challenged. 

The ordinary referendum procedure, 
with perhaps a requirement of a larger 
number of names on the petition. 

20. Should the referendum be made 
available as a means of reinstating in 
effect state statutes held unconstitutional 
by the state courts? 

If so, should it be limited to decisions 
declaring legislative acts unconstitutional 
under the "police power"? 

20. Yes. 

I see no reason for any limitation. 

2i. If the referendum on judicial de- 
cisions or what has been called the "re- 
call of judicial decisions" is to be 
adopted, should the measure affected be 
required to be repassed by the legislative 
body before it is submitted to the people? 

Should the legislature take the initi- 
ative in submitting the question to the 
people? 

Should the people have the right by 
petition to invoke the referendum for 
the reinstatement of the statute? 

21. No. 

It may, but this privilege should also 
be open to the voters. 



Yes. 

22. Do you think that the "recall of 
judicial decisions," in some form, is pre- 
ferable to the initiative on constitutional 
amendments, as a mode of dealing with 
certain classes of cases, or is valuable as 
a supplementary method of control? 

State your reasons. 

22. No. 

Let us have both, and give the voters 
free reign under the usual restrictions 
and requirements of initiative and 
referendum constitutional amendments. 

23. Do you think that, at the present 
time, agitation of the "recall of de- 
cisions" as a Progressive measure would, 
in your community, tend to strengthen 
or weaken the popular support of the 
Progressive party? 

23. Whatever is right should be ad- 
hered to, whether popular or not. If it 
is right it is sure to become popular 
in time, and a party may thus prove its 
ability and its right to lead. 

24. What other measures of judiciary 
reform do you believe should be actively 
advocated, at this time, by the Progress- 
ive party? 

24. The methods of court procedure, 
manner of making indictments, etc., are 
sadly in need of reform, but I cannot 
enter into particulars here. 

III. The Recall. 

1. Should the right of recall extend 
to judicial officers? 

1. Yes. 

2. Should the right of recall extend 
to the principal appointive officers of the 
state or city? 

If so, should the people merely have 
the right to remove or should they have 
the right of naming the successor of the 
person removed? 

2. Yes. 
Both. 

3. Should the recall apply to all elect- 
ive officials? 

If not, what classes of officials should 
be exempt? 



Direct Legislation Record 



27 



3. Yes. 

4. Should the adoption of the recall 
be accompanied by either (1) the length- 
ening of official terms, or 

(2) by the abolition of fixed tenure of 
office? 

4. I think not. Invoking the recall 
is an extraordinary procedure, which we 
hope will not occur often. Normal 
terms of office should be continued, 
though with popular control both of 
officers and their acts, a tendency toward 
longer regular terms would be reason- 
able and would be welcomed both by 
the public and by officers. 

5. How should signatures on recall 
petitions be verified? 

Should payment for services in secur- 
ing signatures be prohibited? 

5. See answer to No. 6, under the 
"Initiative." 

See answer to No. 6, under the "Initi- 
ative." 

6. Should canvassing for recall sig- 
natures be permitted or should voters 
desiring to sign recall petitions be re- 
quired to visit certain designated places 
to sign the petitions placed there for 
signature? 

6. Included in reply to No. 6 under 
the "Initiative." 

7. Should recall Petitions require the 
signatures of an absolute number of 
electors or of a certain percentage of 
them? 

If the latter, what percentage? 

7. See reply to No. 3 under the 
"Initiative." 

The number, or the percentage, is 
usually, and perhaps properly, put higher 
than for the initiative or referendum. 
Say 12% to 15% for state and 20% 
to 25% for local recall. 

8. Should an opportunity of voting 
upon the question of the recall of a 
long-term official be given to the elect- 
ors at stated intervals? 

8. I think not, unless the term is very 
long. 



p. Should a public official be granted 
a certain minimum time on assuming 
office before being subjected to the 
recall? 

9. Yes. 

10. Should there be any limit upon 
the frequency or the number of times 
that the recall may be invoked against 
a public official? 

If so, what limitation would you sug- 
gest? 
10. Yes. 
Once in a term of reasonable length. 

11. How much time should elapse 
after the filing of the petitions before 
the recall election? 

11. About 60 days for a state recall, 
and 30 days or possibly less for a local 
recall. 

12. Should there be any limitation as 
to the lapse of time after the first sig- 
natures to a recall petition are secured 
before the petition must be completed 
and filed? 

12. I think so. Perhaps six or eight 
months in a state recall, and three or 
four months in a local recall. 

13. Should petitions be required to 
state the reasons why the recall of an 
official is demanded? 

13. Yes. 

14. Should the question of the recall 
or removal of the official be submitted 
at a separate election, leaving any va- 
cancy to be filled as if it had occurred 
from any other cause? 

14. No. Submit the question of recall 
and fill the possible vacancy at the same 
election. 

15. If the question of the recall and 
the election of a successor are to be de- 
termined at the same election, should 
the question of the recall be determined 
by a separate "yes" and "no" vote? 

15. Yes. 

16. Should the petitioners for the re- 
call of a public official be required or 
permitted to propose the name of a 
successor? 



28 



Equity 



16. They should be permitted to do 
so, but not required. 

17. For a recall election, should nomi- 
nations of candidates for the office be 
made in the same way as for a regular 
election ? 

17. The name or names for a possible 
successor should be nominated by pe- 
tition. 

18. At a recall election should the 
incumbent go on the ballot as a candi- 
date unless he takes affirmative action 
to keep his name off? 

18. No. He should not be permit- 
ted to be a candidate in the ordinary 
sense. If the recall succeeds he is out; 
if it fail, he remains in. In that pe- 
culiar way he is necessarily a candi- 
date. 

19. If the incumbent resigns after the 
filing of a recall petition, what should 
be the procedure as to the filling of the 
office? 

19. By a special election, if a regular 
election is not soon due. Whether or 
not he shall be permitted to become a 
candidate for such extra election, is a 
question. I am inclined to think that 
he should be so permitted. 

20. At a recall election what oppor- 
tunity should the petitioners and the 
incumbent have for placing upon the 
ballot statements of their respective 
claims? 

20. Each side should be permitted 
space for at least 200 words. 

21. Should the recall carry any pen- 
alty other than removal from office? 

21. I think not. If there is occasion 
for any further action, the ordinary 
legal procedures should be invoked. 

22. Should a public official be reim- 
bursed out of the public treasury for 
legitimate expenses in defending him- 
self against a recall campaign? 

If so, what conditions or limitations 
would you suggest? 

22. Doubtful. 

A very strict limitation, if allowed at 
all. The limitation should be in the 



kind of expenses, as well as in the 
amount. 

23. Should a recalled official have the 
right to a part or all of the salary of 
the office for the remainder of the term 
for which he was originally elected? 

23. No. 

24. Is the recall an essential adjunct 
of the short ballot and concentrated re- 
sponsibility? 

24., Perhaps not an essential adjunct, 
but a very desirable one. 



Republican Use of the Referendum. 

Chastened by their defeat at the last 
presidential election, the men in charge 
of the Republican party organization 
have now decided to make certain re- 
forms in the ascertainment of the party's 
will at future national conventions. 
While we are not here concerned with 
the partisan aspects of the action taken 
by the Republican National Committee 
at Washington on December 16th and 
17th, when the southern representation 
was cut down, it is worthy of note by all 
friends of popular government that this 
committee of Republican leaders did 
bow to public opinion to the extent of 
agreeing to accept delegates to future 
conventions chosen under a direct pri- 
mary law by the party membership. 
Furthermore, it is also worthy of note 
that these same Republicans decided to 
adopt the party reforms through the 
process of a Referendum to the various 
state organizations to be expressed in 
state conventions. This plan takes the 
place of a special national convention in 
1914, as advocated by a minority of the 
Committee. 



My Dear Dr. Taylor: — I appreciate your 
magazine beyond measure. Always bear in 
mind, however, to explain Direct Legislation, 
Proportional Representation and Short Ballot 
anew in every issue. Otherwise, the maga- 
zine will be interesting to veterans only. 

Sincerely, H. C. Maguire, 
[Member of New York Committee to 
Lower Rents and Reduce Taxes on 
Homes.] 



Direct Legislation Record 



29 



The March of Popular Government. 
Arkansas. 

The question whether hogs may or 
may not run loose in the streets of Der- 
mott, Ark., is not in itself a matter of 
very great concern to the nation at 
large. But a ruling on that question 
which Attorney-General Moose, of Ar- 
kansas, has made on request of the Sec- 
retary of State does involve a principle 
bearing on the possible limitation of the 
power of popular Referendum in a city 
or town. This legal officer holds that 
the people of Dermott cannot refer to 
themselves the question giving "the 
freedom of the city" to said hogs. His 
theory is that the people may not tamper 
with any ordinance by Referendum vote 
if the ordinance involves the police 
power of the existing local government. 
This decision, however, does not ex- 
tend beyond the confines of Arkansas, 
and it remains to be seen what position 
will be taken elsewhere on this prin- 
ciple. 

The leaders of organized labor in 
Arkansas have started a movement for 
the repeal of the emergency clause in 
the tenth amendment of the state con- 
stitution. This action is due to a re- 
cent decision of the Supreme Court of 
Arkansas in upholding the Going anti- 
liquor law on the ground that the legis- 
lature is the sole judge as to when an 
emergency exists. The labor men say 
that such a view virtually nullifies the 
Referendum clause of the amendment. 

Organized labor in Arkansas is also 
initiating bank guaranty and child- 
labor bills. To this end letters have 
been sent to all branches of the labor 
organizations affiliated, asking members 
to assist in the circulation of petitions. 

In a decision handed down by the 
Supreme Court of the state on Decem- 
ber 22d, and written by Chief Justice 
McCulloch, the Initiative and Refer- 
endum amendment, added to the Ar- 
kansas constitution in 1910, was sus- 
tained in the sense that the legislature 



had power to enact it. A test case 
had come up from Mena and involved 
the power of municipalities to submit 
to a referendum of the voters the 
granting of an electric light and power 
franchise. 

California. 

Another "burning issue" — that of 
prohibition — in addition to four pre- 
viously referred and three initiated (see 
on page 214 of the October Equity), will 
be settled by the votes of the people in 
California at the 1914 general election. 
Petitions from ten counties, aggregating 
25,693 signatures, were filed at Sacra- 
mento on December 29th. The proposed 
law is reported to be one of the most 
drastic prohibition laws ever offered to 
American voters. It prohibits the sale 
or manufacture of intoxicating liquors 
in the state except for scientific or 
medicinal purposes. 

Other questions of law enactment 
which are to come before the electors 
of California at the next election in- 
clude the universal eight-hour day of 
labor, the abolition of the death penalty, 
abolition of the poll tax, declaring to 
be public nuisances buildings used for 
prostitution, a "blue sky" law, concerning 
the sale of wild game, and creating a 
state water commission. 

Connecticut. 

At the last election, in November, the 
people of Connecticut had the oppor- 
tunity to say yes or no as to whether 
or not the salary of their legislators 
(the state senators and representatives) 
should be increased from $300 a year 
to $500 a year. A constitutional amend- 
ment to this effect had been submitted 
by the last legislature. The amendment 
was lost by the vote of 25,393 no to 
17,812 yes. 

Generally, where a proposition for in- 
creased pay to public officials has been 
submitted to a popular Referendum the 
people have voted it down. On the 
other hand, legislative bodies have not 



30 



Equity 



usually displayed the utmost restraint 
in this respect. 

That, however, is not the main point 
of this Connecticut Referendum vote. 
If the reader will refer to the valuable 
table compiled on page 156 of July 
Equity, showing the membership of the 
various state legislatures in relation to 
population, etc., he will find that the 
Connecticut voters knew what they were 
about. For he will see that in Con- 
necticut, with a population of 1,114,756, 
there are 35 senators and 258 members 
of the House — the latter being far in 
excess of the House members of more 
populous states. Had the amendment 
proposed a reduction in the size of the 
legislature, particularly of the House, 
it is reasonable to suppose that the re- 
sult of the vote would have been favor- 
able. Certainly the increase in salary 
could be more appropriately regarded 
with favor if the number of law- 
makers were substantially reduced. The 
future trend will be toward fewer and 
better paid legislators, and perhaps a 
single house, with constant service of 
the legislators — a sort of commission. 

Delaware. 

Signs of a waking up at last in the 
only state which still leaves to the legis- 
lature the amendment of its constitution 
without a popular Referendum! The 
cheering news comes that the Delaware 
Referendum League (Wilmington, Del.) 
has experienced a new birth of enthusi- 
asm and activity. Besides holding a 
number of well-attended public meet- 
ings addressed by speakers of national 
reputation, this organization has begun 
the publication of a little quarterly 
magazine dealing with the I. and R. 
movement and other governmental re- 
forms in that state. It is called the 
Delaware Referendum News and is 
furnished to subscribers at fifty cents 
a year. We wish for it all success in 
its field. 

The first number of this Delaware 



magazine has an article concerning an 
instructive lesson which the city of 
Wilmington is just now learning. Under 
an act of the legislature of 1907 that 
city acquired the right to have its mayor 
and council submit to a Referendum 
vote, on formal application of 10% of 
the qualified voters, any question relat- 
ing to the affairs of the city. Prior to 
the election of last June a duly signed 
petition was sent to the mayor and 
council asking that the matter of acquir- 
ing a city river-front property be sub- 
mitted to the people, inasmuch as a 
group of land speculators organized as 
the Terminal Company by a legislative 
"joker" had got the state to deed to 
them about five hundred acres of land 
literally created by the dredging oper- 
ations of the Federal government. The 
"joker" was hidden in what is known as 
the "Bulkhead Law," and at the last ses- 
sion of the legislature the House re- 
pealed it, but the reactionary Senate 
stood in the way. Hence the resort to 
the Referendum powers, with the result 
that the mayor and council were or- 
dered by an 8-to-l majority vote first 
to test the Bulkhead law and then to 
proceed to acquire the river front in 
question by legal proceedings and con- 
demnation if necessary. In that Refer- 
endum 67.15% of the total vote was 
recorded, an unusual showing of the 
popular will on a local issue. Evidently 
the people of Wilmington are aroused 
over what they regard as an attempt 
to hold them up. 

Meanwhile nothing has been done by 
the council other than to order its com- 
mittees on navigation and finance to 
negotiate with the "owners of the lands 
along the river bank." But it was 
about the legality of the land owner- 
ship that the Referendum was initiated. 
The law governing this Referendum pro- 
vides for the punishment of officials 
who fail to obey the orders of the peo- 
ple, conviction of such failure being 
cause for a fine at the discretion of the 



Direct Legislation Record 



31 



court and the removal of the official in 
question. This would be in any case 
a slow, difficult and costly process, and 
the whole situation well illustrates the 
need of the people's power to recall 
officials who disregard a popular man- 
date. Without the Referendum the 
scheme of these political land speculators 
would probably never have been called 
in question. 

District of Columbia. 

In the only part of the United States 
where men as well as women are by 
law denied any participation in their 
local government, namely, the great 
capital city of the nation, radical changes 
are now at last taking shape looking 
toward the grant of popular home rule. 
One bill is already before the House 
of Representatives to authorize "an ad- 
visory Referendum vote of the people" 
of the District of Columbia on the gen- 
eral question as to whether Congress 
should grant "a model charter establish- 
ing the right of suffrage in said Dis- 
trict, with municipal self-government in 
local affairs." This bill was brought 
in by Representative Tavenner, of Illi- 
nois, and provides also for the ex- 
pression of the voters on seven other 
definite questions: as to having a dele- 
gate in Congress, as to a property or 
educational qualification for the ballot, 
as to the Initiative and Referendum 
and Recall, as to woman suffrage and 
as to the commission form of govern- 
ment. It is proposed that women shall 
take part in this initial Referendum. 

In addition to this a complete form 
of government for the District of Co- 
lumbia has been prepared as a bill by 
Representative Prouty, of Iowa, a jurist 
of ripe experience, who is a member 
of the District Committee. This bill 
would authorize the election of a mayor 
and six commissioners for two-year 
terms, a delegate in Congress, and a 
provision for the Initiative, Referendum 
and Recall. 



Whether the administration will favor 
action on either of these bills at this 
session is not yet certain, but the pub- 
lication of their proposals has stirred 
the people of Washington to a renewed 
activity for their own enfranchisement 
and right of self-government. 

Illinois. 

The Civic League of Chicago gloats 
over the part it played in defeating the 
submission of the I. and R. amendment. 
But its delight will not last long, for 
the progressive people of Illinois will 
never be satisfied until they have the 
right to demand a vote upon measures. 

The present constitution of Illinois 
is becoming ancient. It was adopted in 
1870 and was patterned after the previ- 
ous constitution of 1848. Those are 
ancient days in a state that has made 
civilization and history as fast as Illinois 
has done. 

The defeat of the I. and R. amend- 
ments brings up a much more radical 
proposition, that is, to call a consti- 
tutional convention in Illinois and give 
the old document a complete overhaul- 
ing. That is likely to be the result 
of the strenuous effort of the Chicago 
Civic Federation and other reactionary 
influences in that state in defeating the 
I. and R. amendment. 

The peculiar "holdback" feature of 
the Illinois constitution is the provision 
that only one article can be amended 
at one election. This is the special 
feature that was carried over from the 
old constitution of 1848. For several 
years past there has been a contest con- 
cerning the submission of an I. and R. 
amendment, or an amendment concern- 
ing revenue reform. As neither would 
yield to the other, the result was that 
neither amendment was submitted. Con- 
tests of this kind are likely to con- 
tinue until a way out is found through 
a new constitution. 

Another way out would be by all 
parties combining on an amendment 



32 



Equity 



which would remove the limitation above 
referred to — that is, an amendment pro- 
viding that there shall be no limit to 
the number of constitutional amend- 
ments that may be submitted at one 
election. After the adoption of such 
an amendment, the above-mentioned 
contests for preference in the submis- 
sion of certain amendments would cease, 
for then as many amendments as de- 
sired could be submitted at the same 
election. In nearly all the other states 
there has never been any restriction as 
to the number of amendments that 
might be submitted at one election, and 
we cannot call to mind any abuse of 
this privilege. Therefore such an 
amendment to the Illinois constitution 
would not be in any sense radical. If 
there had been a union on this program 
a few years ago, the difficulty would 
have been cleared away before now. This 
must be done at the earliest possible time, 
or there must be a new constitution. 
Which shall it be? And a new consti- 
tution would do much more than fix this 
little anomalous feature of the old docu- 
ment. The great state of Illinois can- 
not and will not stop in the onrush of 
civilization. 

Kansas. 

A new and powerful impulse has been 
given to the Referendum movement in 
Kansas since the failure of the legis- 
lature of 1913 to submit an I. and R. 
amendment as called for by all the 
party platforms in that state. This new 
impulse comes from the women of the 
"Sunflower" state, newly endowed with 
the privilege and duty of the ballot. 
From all parts of the state there came 
to Topeka on November 29th leading 
women of all party faiths, where they 
held a conference as to what measures 
ought to receive the attention of the 
party platform builders the coming year. 
This first state conference of Kansas 
women voters came to the wise con- 
clusion that the first thing to be done, 
before expecting to realize any of the 



particular reforms to which they are 
devoted, indeed, as the best means of 
securing grear popular reforms, would 
be to have the Initiative and Referendum 
powers incorporated into the state con- 
stitution. Also they no longer feared, 
with the ballot in their hands, that a 
Referendum law would disturb the 
prohibition system in their state. 

Hence the women's conference de- 
cided to go to work for the I. and R. ; 
and as there are estimated to be about 
275,000 women voters in the state, it 
is altogether probable that their in- 
fluence will carry the day in the next 
legislature of a state already so far 
committed to progressive legislation. 
Other measures advocated at the con- 
ference of women voters were : Rais- 
ing the legal age of women from 18 to 
21, a $500 tax exemption for all house- 
holders and a law giving equal prop- 
erty rights. Another conference was 
arranged for in order to draw up a 
platform on child-welfare legislation, 
prohibition of the marriage of the unfit 
and widows' pensions. The conference 
sent a memorial to Congress asking that 
an equal suffrage amendment be sub- 
mitted to the people granting equal 
suffrage in all states. 

Kentucky. 

At the November election in 1913 two 
constitutional amendments were adopted 
by popular vote in Kentucky. We can- 
not at present writing give exact figures, 
but they seem to have been carried by 
a vote of about 2 to 1. One authorizes 
the use of convict labor to aid counties 
in road and bridge construction. The 
other authorizes the assembly to levy an 
annual tax for the expenses of the state 
government and to classify property for 
purposes of taxation. 

The Kentucky legislature will meet on 
January 6, 1914. It is quite likely that 
efforts will be made to place Kentucky 
among the progressive states by the sub- 
mission of an I. and R. amendment. 



Direct Legislation Record 



33 



Maine. 

At a special election on September 8th 
the electors of Maine had the privilege 
of doing two strokes of law-making on 
their own account, in one of which 
they relieved themselves from the neces- 
sity of holding special elections for the 
voting on constitutional amendments in 
future. This amendment, as submitted 
by the last legislature, provides that 
hereafter any amendment proposed by 
a two-thirds vote of both houses of the 
legislature shall be submitted to the 
people at the next following biennial 
congressional elections, same to be en- 
acted "by a majority of the inhabitants 
voting on the question." On this 
amendment the vote was 16,746 for and 
6,741 against. This is a step in line 
with the prevailing tendency to make 
the alteration of constitutions less diffi- 
cult. 

The other amendment submitted to 
the Maine voters gave to the legislature 
power "to levy a tax upon intangible 
personal property at such rate as it 
deems wise and equitable without re- 
gard to the rate applied to other classes 
of property." This also carried, by the 
vote of 18,060 for to 8,157 against. 

Maryland. 

A practical object lesson in the work- 
ing of the Referendum principle was ex- 
perienced by the people of Maryland at 
the November election when six amend- 
ments to the constitution were ratified 
by popular vote. 

One had to do with the exercise of 
the power of eminent domain. Another 
aimed at a very common evil of our 
legislative bodies, that of crowding too 
much law-making into the last few days 
of a session. This amendment forbids 
the origination of a bill in either house 
during the last ten days of the session 
unless two-thirds of the members so 
decide by a yea and nay vote. Also 
the requirement was added that no bill 
could become a law until read on three 



different days of the session in each 
house unless exception were made by 
a two-thirds vote. A third amendment 
had to do with the local operations of 
the judges of the circuit courts of the 
states. A fourth adds to the penalties 
for election corruption the permanent 
disqualification from the holding of 
public office. The fifth amendment 
further defines the duties of state at- 
torneys and the penalties for their re- 
ceiving any other fee or reward than 
their salary. The sixth amendment de- 
fines further the duties of the attorney- 
general. 

The vote by which these constitutional 
amendments were passed is not avail- 
able officially as yet, but we have 
the authoritative statement of Secre- 
tary of State Graham that they were 
adopted. 

The Maryland legislature, which is 
to meet on January 7, 1914, is likely 
to have a good chance to distinguish 
itself by offering to the people a gen- 
eral I. and R. amendment to the con- 
stitution. Such a measure was for the 
first time in this state seriously con- 
sidered by the last legislature in 1912, 
when under the lash of the old reaction- 
ary party bosses, it was tabled only by 
the close vote of 41 to 35. Since that 
time evidence of the rapid popular 
spread of opinion favorable to the 
Referendum idea has been shown in 
the adoption of planks for it in the 
platforms of the Republican and Pro- 
gressive parties of Maryland, and in 
its advocacy before the Resolutions 
Committee of the Democratic conven- 
tion, where it was first adopted, but 
upon reconsideration at the demand of 
reactionaries it failed by the vote of 
17 to 10. 

Under these circumstances the pros- 
pects are excellent that Maryland will 
swing into line this year with the sub- 
mission of a popular-government amend- 
ment to her fundamental law. 

A need in Maryland, as in many other 



34 



Equity 



states, is Home Rule for municipalities. 
This can be attained either by a general 
law or a constitutional amendment. The 
former is the quickest way to get free- 
dom for municipalities, but the latter 
way is considered the safest because the 
most permanent. However, we favor 
statutory action, as such a law once 
achieved and operations established 
under it, would not be likely to be dis- 
turbed by subsequent legislatures. We 
commend as a model the Optional City 
Government bill which was before the 
New York legislature last winter, and 
which is likely to become law in New 
York this winter. The local I. and R. 
feature in this bill is the best we have 
seen. 

One of the difficulties in the way of 
liberal municipal laws in Maryland is 
the overshadowing importance and in- 
fluence of Baltimore. The law could 
be drawn so as to omit Baltimore from 
its provisions, and thus the other mu- 
nicipalities of the state could be set free 
to join in the race with municipalities 
of other states for the best possible 
local government. Baltimore should 
also be set free to work out its own 
destinies in its own way if it so wishes, 
but it could be treated as a separate 
consideration, in order that it might 
not be in the way of what other Mary- 
land municipalities may wish to do. 

Massachusetts. 

Let it be understood by all that the 
people of the Bay State still are denied 
the right to govern themselves directly 
through the Initiative and Referendum 
powers, notwithstanding that at the 
election on November 4th last the peo- 
ple of that state did ratify by a large 
majority a constitutional amendment 
authorizing what the newspaper reports 
called "a general referendum" amend- 
ment. What the last legislature did 
submit for popular ratification was an 
amendment granting to the legislature 
a power possessed by nearly all the 



state legislatures,* namely, the power to 
submit by a majority yea and nay vote 
any of the acts of the legislature to a 
vote of the people at the next general 
election for their rejection or approval. 
On that question the voters of Massa- 
chusetts gave their approval by the 
vote of 206,689 for to 77,767 against. 

This same legislature, which thus 
ostentatiously asked the people to grant 
power to itself, at its own pleasure, 
to refer its acts to the people, still con- 
tained enough of the men subservient 
to the reactionary influences operating 
through Republican leaders like Senator 
Lodge and ex-Senator Crane, to defeat 
the submission of a genuine I. and R. 
amendment giving this same privilege to 
the people themselves. (See article on 
page 187 of July Equity for full re- 
port of how that battle was lost.) 

But with the counting of the votes 
cast in Massachusetts last November, 
showing the Republican candidate for 
governor a poor third in the race and 
the Progressives scoring a close second, 
the prospects are now brighter than 
ever that at the coming session of 1914 
a real and serviceable I. and R. amend- 
ment will be submitted, after which the 
required affirmation by the legislature of 
1915 and subsequent ratification by the 
people on election day will be a fore- 
gone conclusion. 

The line-up in the lower house for 
1914 is thus: 103 Democrats, 18 Pro- 
gressives, 1 Socialist and 1 Independent 
committed to the I. and R. measure; to 
which we may add with reasonable cer- 
tainty the twenty-seven Republicans who 
last year voted for the bill and were 
returned, and four newly elected Re- 
publicans known to be favorably dis- 
posed; making a total of one hundred 
and fifty-four to be counted on and only 
six short of the two-thirds vote required 
on constitutional amendments in the 
House. There are forty-four new Re- 

*For details concerning other states, see 
page 24, this issue. 



Direct Legislation Record 



35 



publican members never recorded on 
this subject and born to their legislative 
life under the Progressive skies. It is 
a fairly safe prediction that at least 
six of these will fall into line. 

In the Senate the adoption of the 
amendment requires only a majority 
vote, and more than that number are as- 
sured, as seventeen Democrats and two 
Progressives are pledged, while six Re- 
publicans who voted for the bill last 
year are returned. Twenty-one makes 
a majority. 

That the I. and R. amendment, when 
passed by both houses, will encounter a 
friendly reception at the hands of the 
new Governor, David I. Walsh, may be 
gathered from a sample of the Govern- 
or's remarks on the question while he 
was canvassing the state in October. 
Said he: 

The strongest argument in favor of direct 
legislation, otherwise known as the initiative 
and referendum, lies in the fact that every dis- 
honest politician, every selfish public utility 
corporation and every self-seeking interest is 
against it. 

The direct legislation movement is really the 
great Democratic movement of the age. Our 
party in this state is unanimous for it. Ten 
states have already adopted it in some form. 
The enemies of the movement are fond of de- 
claring that it means mob rule. There is no 
truth in this statement. In fact, it is a con- 
servative movement. Under it no legislation 
can be accomplished in haste. 

One other amendment to the Massa- 
chusetts constitution was voted on at 
the last election, namely, making women 
eligible to appointment as notaries pub- 
lic. This was defeated by the vote of 
181,343 against to 154,691 for. 

Michigan. 

The most notable result thus far of 
the new home-rule law, which was 
adopted by the legislature of Michigan 
last winter, is the proposed new charter 
for the city of Detroit to be voted on by 
the people of that city at a special elec- 
tion on February ioth. This charter con- 
tains what its makers regard as "the 



first full measure of home rule," a new 
bill of rights and a form of government 
in keeping with the ideals of this gen- 
eration. Its two chief objects are con- 
centration of responsibility and the 
simplification of elections. 

First, in order to avoid the confusion 
of national party issues with local elec- 
tions, a non-partisan and preferential bal- 
lot is offered, doing away with party 
primaries and making impossible the 
election of minority candidates. Terms 
of office are extended from two to four 
years and the city elections will be held 
separate from state and national elec- 
tions. 

Second, the mayor will have power to 
veto estimates and to appoint his own 
department heads and to discharge them. 

Third, the Initiative, Referendum and 
Recall are provided for. On this point 
the committee, headed by Frederick F. 
Ingram, appointed by the Charter Com- 
mission to write the address to the peo- 
ple on the proposed charter, says: "To 
place such power in the hands of an 
elected official, without retaining the 
power to recall, would be fatal." Still 
the number of voters to initiate the 
mayor's recall is placed rather high — 
25%. But 5% of the voters may initi- 
ate or refer ordinances, or may submit 
the repeal of any ordinance. 

Fourth, the Board of Estimates is 
abolished, and the number of aldermen 
will be reduced one-half, or to one from 
each ward. All this makes for a shorter 
ballot. 

Fifth, the new charter incorporates the 
amendment adopted last spring by the 
voter; of Detroit, providing for city 
ownership and operation of street rail- 
ways. 

New York. 

A year of terrific factional strife 
within the Democratic party of New 
York State, which included the highly 
dramatic impeachment trial and convic- 
tion of Governor Sulzer by the Tam- 
many-controlled legislature owing to 



36 



Equity 



the independent course taken by Sulzer 
as to party spoils, has ended in a sweep- 
ing legislative reversal of that party's 
previous stand on questions of popular 
control as direct party primaries, etc., 
through the instrumentality of Sulzer's 
successor, Governor Glynn, and the 
same legislature that deposed Sulzer. 
Not only this, but also the people 
of the great Empire State at last 
are to have the opportunity to say yes 
or no whether they want their con- 
stitution revised and brought abreast 
of present-day thought and ideals of 
popular government. 

Leaders of Tammany Hall have ap- 
parently accepted the result of the last 
election as a verdict against the old 
boss-manipulated party convention, and 
some of them go so far as to sa}' that 
they will no longer oppose the demand 
of the people for Initiative and Refer- 
endum. For instance, John A. McCooey, 
known as "Boss" McCooey, who dom- 
inates Brooklyn for Tammany, in the 
course of a newspaper interview said 
this: 

The people defeated us at the last election 
for our sins of omission as well as commission. 
So now we will go the whole route and give 
the people all they want and perhaps a bit 
more. They will get statewide primaries with 
a complete elimination of all conventions and 
the Massachusetts ballot. Then they will have 
the initiative and referendum and recall, and 
woman's suffrage, if there is any demand for 
it. I have not the slightest idea whether or 
not I could carry my own district in the pri- 
mary. Mr. Murphy is in the same predicament. 
If the primary bill becomes a law there will be 
no more bosses or district leaders. The people 
will rule absolutely. 

Governor Glynn on December 8th 
sent to the legislature, meeting under 
an extra-session call and therefore lim- 
ited in legislative range to subjects sub- 
mitted by the Governor, a special mes- 
sage proposing several important meas- 
ures, four of which concerned changes 
in governmental processes. He at the 
same time caused to be introduced bills 
putting those measures in legal form 



for enactment, which followed very 
promptly on December 11th and 12th by 
the Senate and House, respectively. 

First, of these four new legislative 
steps taken by New York, let us ex- 
amine the one in relation to the direct 
primary, which Governor Glynn in his 
message said was demanded unmistak- 
ably by public opinion "to insure equality 
among party members in party pri- 
maries." The process of primary vot- 
ing is greatly simplified in the adop- 
tion of the Massachusetts form of bal- 
lot, by the withdrawal of the party 
emblem from the ballot and by the 
abolition of party designations from 
the petitions. This direct system of 
nomination by the party membership in- 
volves the discontinuance of the state 
convention of the parties as a means 
of naming candidates. The law also 
provides for the direct nomination of 
party officers, such as state and county 
committeemen. But nothing is enacted 
to prevent the holding of state con- 
ventions for the purpose of making 
platforms or otherwise advancing the 
cause of a party. Provision is made 
for the election of "delegates and 
alternates-at-large, and district delegates 
and alternates" to national party con- 
ventions at a "spring primary" in the 
year of a presidential election, nomina- 
tions of said delegates to be by petitions 
signed by 3% of the voters in a given 
district. 

Second, the new act to amend the 
election law generally is, in the main, 
the substitution of the Massachusetts 
plan for the existing party-column bal- 
lot. As Governor Glynn well says, the 
Massachusetts plan "requires the voter 
to deliberately express his sovereign 
will with respect to every office and 
upon every candidate for office." He 
insists that the large body of citizens 
who refuse to be allied to any party 
is entitled to the protection of the law 
in the exercise of the elective franchise. 
The New York law, as now revised, 



Direct Legislation Record 



37 



requires five kinds of ballots, as fol- 
lows: "Ballots for presidential electors, 
ballots for general officers, ballots upon 
constitutional amendments and ques- 
tions submitted, ballots upon town 
propositions, and ballots upon town ap- 
propriations." Each ballot must have 
provision for the voter to write in as 
his candidate the name of any person 
not already printed thereon. 

Third. "Shall there be a convention 
to revise the constitution and amend the 
same?" An act was passed for the sub- 
mission of this important question to 
the voters on the first Tuesday in April, 
1914, and, in the event that a majority 
of the voters answer "yes," making 
provision for the choice of delegates to 
a constitutional convention at the No- 
vember election, 1914. The bill does 
not make it clear on what date the con- 
vention, thus authorized, would be con- 
vened, but it is probable that it will 
meet on either January 10th or the first 
Tuesday of April in 1915. 

Fourth, an act was passed for the pur- 
pose of adjusting the present election 
law of the state so as to conform to 
the Federal Constitution, as recently 
amended, for the direct, popular elec- 
tion of United States senators. Such 
election of senators is to take place at 
the general election next preceding the 
expiration of the term of a senator. 
But in case a vacancy should occur 
within thirty days prior to a general 
election, the Governor is to make a 
temporary appointment to fill the office 
until December 1st of the following 
year, or after the next general election. 
This provision is intended to meet the 
situation presented by a vacancy so close 
to an election as to make it impracticable 
to get candidates on the ballots. 

At the last election in New York, 
November 4, 1913, the sovereign people 
of the state added four amendments to 
their fundamental law by large majori- 
ties. The first defines the method for 
ascertaining compensation to owners of 



property taken by the state for public 
use, and empowering the legislature to 
authorize towns to condemn property in 
excess of the amount needed for parks 
and streets. The latter provision is in- 
tended to enable towns to acquire 
sites for needed public buildings. The 
method of compensation in any case 
is to be by a jury or by the Supreme 
Court, with or without a jury, or by not 
less than three commissioners named by 
a court, but never by a referee. On 
this amendment the vote was 424,928 
for and 270,467 against. 

The second amendment provides that 
there shall be no constitutional limi- 
tation upon the power of the legislature 
to enact laws for the protection of the 
lives or safety of employes, for the pay- 
ment of compensation for injuries to 
or death of employes resulting from in- 
juries in service, and for the adjust- 
ment of issues arising from such legis- 
lation. On this question the vote stood 
510,914 for and 194,497 against. 

The third amendment empowers the 
legislature to increase the number of 
judges in any county not to exceed a 
total of one judge for every 200,000 
population or major fraction thereof, 
specifying the time of electing additional 
judges, and that the term of all county 
judges begin the first of January fol- 
lowing their election. The vote on this 
question was 389,971 for and 255,539 
against. 

The fourth amendment authorizes the 
state to use not over 3% of the forest 
preserve lands for the construction of 
state-controlled reservoirs for municipal 
water supply, for state canals and for 
the regulation of the flow of streams. 
On this the vote was 486,264 for and 
187,290 against. 

North Carolina. 

Probably it is just as well for the 
ultimate success of the I. and R. cause 
that the North Carolina legislature at 
its extra session refused to submit to 



38 



Equity 



the people the Referendum bill prepared 
by the constitutional amendment com- 
mission, which measure finally failed of 
passage on October 10th. There's a good 
old saying that "what's worth doing at 
all is worth doing well." As we pointed 
out at some length in the October 
Equity (see page 222), that bill was so 
lumbered up with requirements for the 
reference or initiation of laws that it 
would have been practically inoperative 
and in the end would have prevented or 
greatly delayed the adoption of a better 
I. and R. amendment. For referendum 
petitions the defeated bill would have 
required 10% of the voters in not less 
than fifty counties, and for the initiative 
5% of fifty counties with a provision 
for a second 10% petition in the event 
that the legislature passed a proposed 
law in amended form or failed to pass 
it at all within sixty days. Besides 
these and other difficulties, the bill made 
no provision at all for the amendment of 
the constitution by the people. 

Nevertheless this extra session did 
vote to submit to the people at the gen- 
eral election in 1914 ten amendments to 
the constitution, the main purposes of 
which are as follows: 

1. Substituting the phrase, "War be- 
tween the states," for the words "In- 
surrection or rebellion against the United 
States," and elsewhere eliminating the 
word "rebellion." 

2. Increasing the compensation of the 
members of the General Assembly to $6 
a day for sixty days and decreasing the 
mileage allowance. 

3. Restricting the right of the legis- 
lature to enact laws on certain local and 
private matters. 

4. Changing the day for the inaugu- 
ration of the Governor. 

5. Providing emergency judges to pre- 
vent delays in trials. 

6. Removing obsolete sections from the 
constitution. 

7. Revising the system of revenue and 
taxation with allowance for the income 



tax, state tax on real estate, limiting 
tax rates, and a capitation tax for every 
male citizen. 

8. To prevent the granting of special 
charters to corporations except for cer- 
tain charitable or educational purposes. 

9. To prevent special charters to towns 
or cities. 

10. To require a six months' public 
school term. 

Ohio. 

One result of the first year's experi- 
ence of the people of the Buckeye State 
with their new instrument of self- 
government, the Initiative and Refer- 
endum power, is the discovery that in it 
there is not adequate protection of the 
petitions for initiating or referring 
legislation, and the realization that ways 
must be found to safeguard these es- 
sential processes of expressing the popu- 
lar will. That subject was discussed 
quite fully in the October Equity, and 
it is one deserving of careful study by 
all friends of the I. and R. movement. 
In all probability remedies will be 
brought up in the next session of the 
Ohio legislature (1915). Whatever is 
done in this regard will be watched 
with deep interest by the rest of the 
country, and it will be fully reported in 
Equity. 

The right to petition a referendum on 
laws passed by the legislature was in- 
voked against three measures, namely, 
the Warnes and Kilpatrick taxation bills 
and the Green workmen's compensation 
bill. But on account of alleged gross 
irregularities in the signing of these pe- 
titions, Secretary of State Charles H. 
Graves refused to let the proposed refer- 
endum on said bills go on the election 
ballots. Petitioners objected that it 
would defeat the very purpose of the 
referendum law if an administrative 
officer of the government were thus to 
exercise the right to pass upon the legal- 
ity of petitions presented by the voters. 
They carried the case into the courts 
and the state Supreme Court, by a vote 



Direct Legislation Record 



39 



of 6 to 1, sustained the action of the 
Secretary of State. Hence, the laws in 
question were not submitted and, as 
Secretary Graves declares, "they are 
now in force and effect." 

Nevertheless, the voters of Ohio had 
a number of important decisions to make 
at the polls on election day last No- 
vember, when five amendments to the 
constitution were submitted to the elect- 
orate and one proposed law. Four of 
the proposed amendments were offered 
by the legislature and the official vote on 
these was as follows : 

Proposing the Short Ballot for state 
officers, 461,555 against and 239,126 for; 
proposing Short Ballot for county and 
township officers, 449,492 against and 
217,875 for; exemption from taxation of 
public bonds of the state, county, city 
or village issued in behalf of public 
schools, 340,570 against and 312,332 for; 
making women eligible to appointment as 
officials or employes in public institu- 
tions or departments "affecting or car- 
ing for women or children," which was 
adopted by the vote of 435,222 for to 
255,036 against. 

A fifth amendment to the constitution 
submitted upon an initiative petition, not 
challenged by the Secretary of State, 
proposed a reduction in the membership 
of the state legislature, the house to con- 
sist of 50 members (instead of the 
present number, 123) and the senate to 
consist of 22 members (instead of 33 as 
at present). The vote on this measure 
was 418,114 against and 240,237 for. 

Besides these amendments one pro- 
posed statute was submitted, the object 
of which was to prohibit the shipment, 
conveyance or receiving of intoxicating 
liquors into territory in which their sale 
as a beverage is forbidden. This failed 
by the vote of 455,099 against to 360,534 
for. 

Oregon. 

In the result of the election held last 
November in this state, the first to use 
extensively the I. and R. system of legis- 



lation, ex-President Taft would look in 
vain for any actual traces of the "gusty 
passions of the mob." Rather would he 
find evidence of steadiness and dis- 
crimination in the exercise of legislative 
functions by the electors of Oregon. 
No new laws were initiated, and of the 
five acts of the last legislature which 
were submitted in due form after the 
filing of the referendum petitions, four 
were sustained by popular vote and one 
defeated, presumably because it failed 
properly to safeguard fundamental rights 
of citizens. 

Just how the five bills appeared on the 
official ballots handed out to the voters 
on November 4th was stated in the 
October Equity (see page 226). The 
official abstract of the result of the vot- 
ing before us shows the vote on the 
four measures approved as follows: 

1. To provide funds for repairs and 
additions to the State University build- 
ings : 56,659 for and 40,000 against. 

2. To appropriate $100,000 for the 
erection of a new classroom building for 
the State University: 53,569 for and 
43,014 against. 

3. To provide a district-attorney for 
each county in lieu of the existing plan 
of having one prosecutor for several 
counties with power to appoint deputies : 
54,179 for and 38,159 against. 

4. To create a state accident commis- 
sion and a fund for the compensation of 
injured workmen employed in hazardous 
occupations (the fund to be drawn 
from the state, the employers and the 
employees, and the commission to de- 
termine the amount to be paid to any 
person injured) : 67,814 for and 28,600 
against. 

In reference to the last of these laws, 
all of which are now in effect, we have 
received an interesting analysis of the 
situation from Alfred D. Cridge, of 
Portland, and secretary of the Home 
Tax Exemption League, as follows: 

"The union men are divided upon it. 
While I think it is likely to be hiding 



40 



Equity 



several 'jokers/ I shall vote for it on 
the ground that while far from what we 
should have, it can be amended. I think 
the next step will be state insurance. 
The men who have bitterly fought any 
change in the liability laws are support- 
ing this compensation measure, and 
some of them appear to be too sleekly 
contented with it. The 'plute' press is 
unanimously demanding the compensa- 
tion law, and the workingmen are di- 
vided. This is justifiable ground for 
suspicion. The liability law won by the 
people in 1910 is far from perfect, but 
it is the most sweeping liability law 
ever passed, and does away with many 
abuses. The Oregon supreme court has 
nullified it — pulled its teeth — but has 
done it very gingerly. The upshot of 
the struggle will be that if the working- 
men do find they have been fooled, they 
will come back with a state insurance 
law or amendment that will do things." 

The one measure which was rejected 
is the one which has been most widely 
discussed, namely, to authorize the State 
Board of Health to order sterilization 
operations upon habitual criminals, 
moral degenerates or sexual perverts, 
male or female, and defining who shall 
be considered as such. This bill the 
people defeated by the vote of 41,767 
for to 53,319 against. It became evident 
to a majority of the voters on this ques- 
tion that the wording of the bill left 
too much power in the hands of a state 
board to properly safeguard the funda- 
mental right of every citizen to the in- 
violability of person without judicial 
procedure, and the opportunity for de- 
fence with aid of legal counsel. Had 
the bill contained provision for such 
operations as might be performed with 
the consent of the person operated on, 
it is likely that it would have passed, 
and thus the first step, that of legaliz- 
ing the principle of the sterilization of 
the unfit, might have been taken. 

During the Oregon campaign there 
was a lot of newspaper discussion of 



alleged irregularities in the referendum 
petitions, and a movement was started 
by Senator Bourne to enact a law pro- 
hibiting the payment of money or other 
compensation for the service of circu- 
lating petitions. No case was made out 
against the petitions and, so far, little 
attention has been paid to the Bourne 
movement. 

Pennsylvania. 

In twenty-nine cities of the Keystone 
state the new system of government by 
a small commission, subject to some di- 
rect supervision by the people through 
limited initiative and referendum powers, 
went into effect on December 1st under 
the operation of the Clark law. That 
was just a month sooner than the time 
stated in the October Equity for the 
start of the Pennsylvania cities on the 
right road. While acknowledging the 
error, we are pleased to know that these 
municipalities in fact had the new and 
better form sooner rather than later. 

The cities thus provided with a new 
and a greatly improved instrument of 
government are those coming under the 
designation of "cities of the third class" : 
that is, communities with a population 
over 10,000 and under 100,000. When 
the Clark law was passed there were 
only twenty-three cities of this class in 
the state ; but since then six more places 
have obtained city charters, putting them 
in this class. The law does not apply 
to towns or villages not yet chartered 
as cities. The Pennsylvania cities now 
governed on the new plan are the fol- 
lowing : 



Allentown 


Franklin 


Oil City 


Altoona 


Harrisburg 


Pittston 


Beaver Falls 


Hazleton 


Pottsyille 


Bradford 


Johnstown 
Lebanon 


Reading 


Carbondale 


S. Bethlehem 


Chester 


Lock Haven 


Titusville 


Connellsville 


Meadville 


YVilkes-Barre 


Corry 


McKeesport 


Williamsport 


Easton 


Monongahela 


York 


Erie 


New Castle 





As was pointed out in Equity after 
the passage of the Clark law (see page 
192 of the July issue), the I. and R. 



Direct Legislation Record 



41 



feature of the law, which had been fairly 
good as it first passed the Senate, was 
rendered almost worthless by amend- 
ments in the House. As it now stands 
on the statute books, the conditions for 
initiating a city ordinance are thus: 
Upon the written request of one hun- 
dred voters, the city clerk within ten 
days thereafter shall prepare an official 
petition in behalf of any proposed 
ordinance. This petition shall be adver- 
tised in the papers and be open for sig- 
natures at the clerk's office for ten days. 
If it is signed by 20% of the voters, 
the council shall either pass the ordinance 
desired within twenty days or call a 
special election and have the question 
submitted to the people at the polls. If 
then approved by a majority of those 
voting, the ordinance shall become ef- 
fective, not to be repealed or amended 
within two years except by a vote of the 
people. Similarly, 20% of the voters is 
required to cause an ordinance passed 
by the council to be reconsidered or sub- 
mitted to the people. 

It will be noticed that 20% for both 
I. and R. is a very high requirement. 
When we add to this that every signer 
must conic to the clerk's office to sign, 
and that within ten days, we see that 
the conditions are almost insurmount- 
able, and the probability is that there 
will be no use of the I. and R. in these 
places until this feature of the law is 
amended, which we hope will be done 
by the next legislature. 

Washington. 

One of the strongest arguments in 
support of the principle of popular re- 
call of public officials, judges not ex- 
cepted, has been most impressively furn- 
ished to the people of Washington and 
the nation by the actions and utterances 
of Superior Court Judge Humphries, of 
Seattle, in connection with the effort to 
suppress by court orders and contempt 
proceedings the street meetings of So- 
cialists in that city. After having arbi- 



trarily caused many of the street speak- 
ers to be thrown into jail and having sat 
as judge and jury in a number of con- 
tempt cases, counsel for the Socialists filed 
charges against the judge, and for that 
act counsel was held in contempt. Other 
prominent lawyers were disbarred by this 
judicial tyrant for daring to appear in 
defense of the right of free speech. On 
October 3d he publicly made the follow- 
ing statement: "I am higher than the 
Governor ; I hold the keys ; I can put you 
in jail and I can pardon you; I hold 
liberty and incarceration in my hands." 
He also called attention to the fact that 
the Governor could not remove him and 
that as the legislature would not meet 
for nearly two years, impeachment pro- 
ceedings could not be started against 
him sooner than that. 

Such power as that should never be 
placed in any man; and the fact that 
later Judge Humphries did "come down 
off his high horse" after the Supreme 
Court had heard charges against him 
and Governor Lister had intervened, was 
palpable acknowledgment of the need of 
the Recall. 

Judicial Insolence. 

Seattle has in Judge John E. Hum- 
phries a splendid example of the need of 
the judicial Recall. Not that he is al- 
ways wrong. He can be right when par- 
tizanship happens to drive him that way. 
So it happened that he prevented Mayor 
Cotterill from suppressing the riot-en- 
couraging Seattle Times, he being hostile 
to the mayor and friendly to the Times. 
That fidelity to the constitutional rights 
of free speech and a free press was not 
what influenced him, is shown by the 
fact that a few days later he issued an 
injunction forbidding holding of street 
meetings by some local Socialist orators. 
These Socialists asked for a change of 
venue on the ground of Humphries' 
prejudice against them, but were denied, 
and the injunction was made permanent 
on the same day as the injunction for- 



42 



Equity 



bidding Mayor Cotterill from interfer- 
ing with the Times. 

In the insolent "what-are-you-going- 
to-do-about-it" style that made Boss 
Tweed immortal, Judge Humphries has 
flaunted the helplessness of the people 
in their faces. To a reporter of the 
Seattle Sun he spoke as follows : 

"They can't get rid of me. I shall be 
a-straddle of their necks for a long 
time to come. The only way they can 
get rid of me is to impeach me before 
the Legislature of the State of Washing- 
ton for high crimes and misdemeanors. 
The Legislature doesn't meet again for 
nearly two years. I tell you the only 
way to get rid of a judge is by impeach- 
ment, and they can't impeach me. I am 
not a violator of law. I am not im- 
moral. I am not a drunkard. I never 
took a drink of whiskey in my life, so 
they can't impeach me for drunkenness. 
I never gambled in my life. I am not 
connected with any corporation, so they 
can't charge me with irrigating ditches 
like they did Hanford, and there is no 
crookedness of any kind or description 
they can charge against me." 

Humphries' insolence is to be wel- 
comed. It shows more clearly than any 
long-drawn-out argument wherein im- 
peachment is not an efficient means of 
getting rid of unfit judges. As long as 
a judge abstains from crime, drunken- 
ness and gambling he can be as unjust 
and oppressive as he likes without ren- 
dering himself liable to impeachment; 
and even if he did commit a crime, ac- 
cording to Judge Humphries' own state- 
ment, it might be nearly two years before 
the legislature could meet and the ques- 
tion of his impeachment be taken up. 
Two years ago the legislature of Wash- 
ington submitted a Recall Amendment 
which the people adopted, but in submit- 
ting it the legislature excepted the judi- 
ciary from its provisions. Judge Hum- 
phries shows now what a serious mis- 
take that exception is. — The Public. 
(Italics ours.) 



Mr. Taft and the I. and R. 

Judging from the great demand for 
ex-President Taft as a public speaker, 
and his ready compliance with that de- 
mand, he seems to have adopted public 
speaking as a profession, a la Mr. 
Bryan. It is an honorable and dis- 
tinguished calling, and only those who 
have exceptional gifts can succeed at 
it. Mr. Taft is a pleasing speaker and 
has a very attractive personality. How- 
ever, we regret that he seems to feel 
called upon to oppose popular govern- 
ment on every possible occasion. For 
example, in a speech at the dinner of 
the Pennsylvania Society of New York, 
at the Waldorf-Astoria, New York City, 
December 13th, he said : 

We are going to introduce a system by 
which we shall tire out the electorate through 
having elections every three months, or at 
the will of the cranks and the enthusiasts who 
sign an initiative petition, and we will then 
turn the government over to that active minor- 
ity who are prompted by an earnest desire to 
improve everybody but themselves. 

Mr. Taft should know that in no 
state has an extra election or a special 
election ever been held on account of 
the Initiative. In every constitutional 
provision that has been adopted provid- 
ing for the I. and R., it is provided 
that measures so referred to the voters 
shall be voted on at regular elections. 
In Oklahoma one or two special elec- 
tions have been held for the purpose of 
voting on certain measures, but such 
elections were called by the governor. 
They could not have been demanded 
by the Initiative. 

"Elections every three months, or at 
the will of the cranks and the en- 
thusiasts," have no existence except in 
Mr. Taft's brain. The expression is so 
"loose" and so far from the facts that 
one wonders if champagne had any- 
thing to do with it. There is nothing 
of a jocular nature in this expression 
nor in the context either preceding or 
following, so it could not have been 
meant in fun. And Mr. Taft is a man 



Proportional Representation Review 



43 



"learned in the law,*' particularly in 
constitutional law; and the constitu- 
tions of the I. and R. states are open 
to the inspection of all. Has Mr. Taft 
fallen behind in his favorite study, con- 
stitutional law? or was he in an ir- 
responsible condition ait the time he 
delivered his speech at the dinner on 
December 13th? Some of the com- 
mission-governed cities have a provision 
for special elections under some circum- 
stances on popular demand, but there is 
no indication that Mr. Taft had this in 
mind. 

And how would it be possible to "turn 
the government over to that active 



minority" except by consent of the ma- 
jority? It seems that Mr. Taft's mind 
has a "lapse" every time he speaks of 
the I. and R., which is nearly every 
time that he speaks at all; for he seems 
to consider it his special mission, since 
he left the White House, to destroy the 
I. and R. But, instead, he is destroying 
his own reputation for serious and ac- 
curate thought. Any cause would thrive 
on the kind of opposition that he is 
making to the I. and R. Mr. Taft is 
now the most prominent, most con- 
spicuous and most active opponent of 
the I. and R., and what he offers is very 
weak opposition, indeed. 



PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION REVIEW 

Edited by C. G. Hoag, Haverford, Pa. (June ist till October ist, Tamworth, N. H.) 

Official Organ of the American Proportional Representation League, 

20 Harbord St., Toronto, Canada, and Haverford, Pa. 

Officers of the League: President, William Dudley Foulke. Vice-Presidents, Prof. 
John R. Commons, William S. U'Ren, Mrs. Louis F. Post. Secretaries-Treasurers, Robert Tyson, 
20 Harbord Street, Toronto; C. G. Hoag, Haverford, Pa. (June ist till October ist, Tam- 
worth, N. H.). 

The object of the League is to secure the adoption of proportional representation for the 
election of state legislatures, city councils, and other deliberative or policy-determining bodies. 
The means advocated is some form of effective ballot suitable for such a purpose, that is, a 
ballot that permits the voter to record his real will in respect to the composition of the deliber- 
ative body without fear of that will's being nullified by any arbitrary system of district lines, 
primary elections, or what not. Of the many plans of proportional representation, tried or 
suggested, the League supports none exclusively. It favors each in accordance with its 
practicability for the special application under consideration and with the degree to which it 
is effective in insuring to each voter's will, in respect to the composition of the deliberative 
body in question, neither more nor less than its just weight. 

The secretaries will be glad to advise correspondents in regard to the application of the 
general principle of effective voting to the election of any specified deliberative body. 

All persons in sympathy with the object of the League are invited to become members. 
Annual dues, $i.oo. Larger subscriptions are needed. 



How Shall We Choose Our Presidents? 
President Wilson recommends direct 
presidential primaries because he is 
earnestly seeking a truer and freer 
democracy. Since the wisdom of any 
given method of election depends on 
the mental processes of us all, a recom- 
mendation like this ought to be con- 
sidered by many persons from many 
points of view. My own thesis is that 
a constitutional amendment for choos- 
ing the electors by proportional repre- 
sentation would be more effective for 
democracy than Federal direct party 
primaries and would render the latter 
superfluous. The amendment, which 



would modify the second paragraph of 
Section 1, Article II, and would super- 
sede Amendment XII, might be about 
as follows. The new matter is in italics, 
the rest being already in the Twelfth 
Amendment : 

The < electors shall be chosen at 
large in each state, by proportional 
representation, by the persons quali- 
fied to vote for members of the 
most numerous branch of the state 
legislature. Congress may at any 
time by law make or alter the regu- 
lations for their election, and may 
provide by law for the appointment 
of electors to fill vacancies. The 
Supreme Court shall be ■ judge of 
the returns and qualifications of the 



44 



Equity 



electors. A majority of the elect- 
ors shall constitute a quorum to 
do business, but a smaller number 
may adjourn from day to day and 
may compel attendance. The elect- 
ors shall meet in one place and 
shall take, separately for President 
and Vice-President, one or more 
trial ballots in such manner as they 
may determine, and one final bal- 
lot. In taking the final ballot they 
shall name in their ballots the per- 
son voted for as President and in 
distinct ballots the persons voted 
for as Vice-President. The per- 
son having the greatest number of 
votes for President shall be the 
President, if such number be a ma- 
jority of the whole number of elect- 
ors chosen; and if no person have 
such majority, then from the per- 
sons having the highest numbers, 
not exceeding three, on the list of 
those voted for as President, the 
House of Representatives shall 
choose, by ballot, the President. 
But in choosing the President the 
votes shall be taken by states, the 
representation from each state hav- 
ing one vote; a quorum for this 
purpose shall consist of a member 
or members from two-thirds of the 
states, and a majority of all the 
states shall be necessary to a choice. 
And if the House of Representa- 
tives shall not choose a President, 
whenever the right of choice shall 
devolve upon them, before the 
fourth day of March next follow- 
ing, then the Vice-President shall 
act as President, as in the case of 
the death or other constitutional dis- 
ability of the President. The per- 
son having the greatest number of 
votes as Vice-President shall be the 
Vice-President, if such number be a 
majority of the whole number of 
the electors chosen; and if no per- 
son have a majority, then from the 
two highest members on the list 
the Senate shall choose the Vice- 
President; a quorum for the pur- 
pose shall consist of two-thirds of 
the whole number of senators, and 
a majority of the whole number 
shall be necessary to a choice. But 
no person constitutionally ineligible 
to the office of President shall be 
eligible to that of Vice-President of 
the United States. 

Each state shall choose electors 
to the number of the Representa- 



tives in Congress to which it is en- 
titled, except that each state entitled 
to less than five Representatives 
shall choose five electors, each of 
whom shall cast in the Electoral 
College as many fifths of a vote as 
the number of Representatives to 
which his state is entitled. 
The purpose of the first clause of the 
second sentence of the suggested amend- 
ment is to allow Congress to prevent 
local majorities in the several states 
from establishing, in their own inter- 
est, inaccurate systems of proportional 
representation. 

The purpose of the second paragraph 
is to represent the states more strictly 
according to population, by basing the 
electoral vote on the number of repre- 
sentatives instead of on that of repre- 
sentatives and senators together. The 
plan would do no injustice to the small 
states, however, for proportional rep- 
resentation would break up the arti- 
ficial solidity of the electoral vote of 
large states. The paragraph is not es- 
sential to the scheme as a whole and 
could be omitted if necessary. 

The suggested amendment would give 
approximately equal weight to votes 
cast in every state, so that victory 
would no longer depend so largely as 
it now does upon a few doubtful 
voters in great doubtful states. It would 
spread the interest and stress of the 
campaign throughout the country evenly, 
and would abolish the rule that the 
President must hail from a large state. 
The proposed form of electoral col- 
lege, chosen proportionally and meeting 
in one place, would make possible and 
probable the choice of the President 
by a real majority of all the voters, 
even though the people were divided 
into more than two important parties. 
And not only the minority election of 
a President, but the fear of it, is un- 
desirable. The fear of wasting votes 
tends to suppress new parties, and pre- 
vents the prompt rearrangement of lead- 
ers and people upon the issues of each 



Proportional Representation Review 



45 



new period of our political life. We 
are not divided on one dominant ques- 
tion of principle rigidly and perma- 
nently, and hence our party lines ought 
to be movable. The confusion of the 
tariff, the currency, or the trusts with 
memories of slavery and the Civil War 
is due to a rigidity that is purely arti- 
ficial. So-called parties that continue 
from generation to generation amid 
changing and unrelated issues find their 
real centre for years together in office- 
seeking rather than in measures, and 
train men in a sort of tribal warfare 
rather than in public service. We have 
no way of knowing how many good 
men have been repelled from political 
activity by the artificiality and insincer- 
ity of such parties, combined with the 
apparent hopelessness of acting outside 
of them. Real parties, existing for the 
sake of a principle or a measure or a 
group of measures, will have under pro- 
portional representation every oppor- 
tunity to flourish and to be worthy of 
the service of the most thoughtful 
citizens. 

It is likely that, for the trial ballots, 
such an electoral college would use a 
preferential method, both because it is 
less tedious than repeated balloting and 
because it lends itself better to pledg- 
ing. If there were only three or four 
important candidates, every elector 
might be pledged to an exact order of 
choice, so that the election in that case 
would be just as direct as now. If 
there were a large number of candi- 
dates, some voters, for lack of in- 
formation, might prefer to pledge their 
elector only as to first and second 
choices, for example, leaving later 
choices to his discretion. Sometimes 
certain voters, too, here and there, dis- 
approving of all the conspicuous candi- 
dates, might vote for unpledged elect- 
ors to seek out "presidential timber." 
The proportional plan would give an 
election exactly as direct, in substance, 
as the voters wished to make it, and 



that is direct enough. If you insist 
upon a Simon-Pure direct nomination 
and election at large over so great a 
country as ours, you will, in those in- 
tervals when popular heroes known to 
the whole nation are lacking, restrict 
the voter to candidates by whom, or 
for whom, a vast amount of expensive 
campaigning has been done. 

The best system for choosing elect- 
ors would be either the "schedule" or 
the "list," with no party label on the 
ballot in either case. As the voter could 
easily remember the name of the one 
elector he intended to mark, the label 
would not be needed, and its absence 
would relieve the state of all obli- 
gation to determine what candidates 
were the authorized representatives of 
a party. A suitable list system, in 
which the lists are numbered instead of 
named, is explained on pages 14-17 of 
the League's Pamphlet No. 3 and on 
pages 176-179 of Equity for July, 1913. 

Under such a system of proportional 
representation, if Jones, Brown and 
Robinson, presidential aspirants of the 
same party, had distinct electoral tick- 
ets in the field and polled 25%, 20% 
and 10% of the popular vote respect- 
ively, they would get about these same 
percentages of the electors, and one of 
them would doubtless receive all the 
electoral votes of the party on the final 
ballot. The real choice between them 
would be made at the polls by the full 
election-day membership of the party, 
not by the half or three-quarters of 
it who would attend a primary: it 
would be made in secret without dis- 
closing party affiliations and with no 
possibility of intimidation, yet it would 
also be made without any interference 
in the nature of a "primary raid" by 
unscrupulous members of any other 
party. Would not such a choice as this 
do away with the need of any presi- 
dential primary, voluntary or official, 
direct or indirect? 

It would be a pity for the national 



46 



Equity 



government to follow the states into the 
blind alley of official party regulation. 
If party names are removed from the 
ballot, official regulation is not only 
unnecessary but positively pernicious in 
that it discourages that free voluntary as- 
sociation of the citizens which has always 
been a chief means of political education 
and development. One is surprised to 
read in Senator Cummins' Presidential 
Primary Bill, S. 773, that "it shall be 
unlawful for any person to be a mem- 
ber of or participate in the proceedings 
of any caucus, convention, or meeting 
of such political party called or held 
for the purpose of nominating any such 
candidates, or looking toward such 
nomination in any method or manner 
except by and through the primary elec- 
tion established by this act." The Sena- 
tor must have been reading More's 
Utopia instead of the Constitution of 
the United States. In the former "It is 
death for any to meet and consult con- 
cerning the state, unless it be either in 
the ordinary council or in the assembly 
of the whole body of the people," but in 
the latter "Congress shall make no 
law * * * abridging the freedom 
of speech or of the press, or the right 
of the people peaceably to assemble." 
J. DeLancey Verplanck. 

Fishkill-on-Hudson, N. Y. 
Editorial Comment. 

The scheme of reform in our method 
of electing the President and the Vice- 
President advocated in Mr. Verplanck's 
article above seems to me to offer the 
best way out of our present difficulties 
and abuses. 

Instead of doing away with national 
party conventions, as is provided for in 
Senator Cummins' Bill (S. 773) and as 
is implied in the President's recom- 
mendation of national presidential pri- 
maries, the scheme outlined by Mr. Ver- 
planck allows party conventions to con- 
tinue as of old, but to have only the 
influence which, in the opinion of the 
whole people, they deserve. 



The scheme makes unnecessary the 
vast machinery that would be required 
to institute nation-wide presidential 
primaries. 

It makes votes approximately equal in 
value throughout all the states. The 
mere adoption of a system of primaries, 
however, would do nothing towards cor- 
recting the obvious defect in the present 
system that the votes necessary to turn 
the scale in a great state like New York 
may count for ten or twenty times as 
much in the make-up of the Electoral 
College as those necessary to turn the 
scale in such a state as Idaho or Ari- 
zona. 

The scheme provides a method by 
which the President and the Vice-Presi- 
dent can be elected by a majority in- 
stead of by a mere plurality. The 
means by which the majority could 
unite would doubtless be the Nanson 
preferential ballot, which would pre- 
sumably be used by the Electoral Col- 
lege in taking the trial ballots provided 
for in the amendment suggested by Mr. 
Verplanck. That ballot, as has been 
clearly demonstrated, indicates infal- 
libly, provided only that the voters use 
the privilege of expressing their real will 
on the ballot adequately, which one of 
the candidates under consideration is 
preferred by a majority of the voters 
against any other of the candidates 
taken singly. 

The scheme provides most satisfac- 
torily for the election of as many 
pledged and as many unpledged electors 
as the voters of the country wish to 
elect. With such a system a few un- 
pledged voters would, I believe, be 
elected; and I hold that the opportunity 
of electing such unpledged electors 
ought to be left open to the voters. 
Though the Electoral College, as 
hitherto elected, has become useless, 
we do not know that it may not be- 
come useful when elected by a suitable 
and reasonable method. 

Finally, Mr. Verplanck's scheme pro- 



Proportional Representation Review 



47 



poses the introduction into our political 
life, where its introduction is con- 
venient and obviously reasonable, of the 
system of "proportional" or unanimous- 
constituency representation which, when 
once introduced, will be found to be 
what we have long and urgently needed 
for the election of all our represent- 
ative or deliberative bodies. If pro- 
portional representation is introduced 
for the election of presidential electors, 
it will not take the people long to 
realize that the representative character 
of Congress itself would be greatly im- 
proved by the adoption of the same sys- 
tem for the election of members of 
Congress. The ultimate outcome, there- 
fore, of the proposed reform in the 
method of electing the presidential elect- 
ors might be the making over of Con- 
gress itself into a truly representative 
body of one chamber, fit to be the 
basis and centre of the federal govern- 
ment of the future. C. G. Hoag. 



The Movement for Electoral Reform in 
France. 

On November 18th the French Cham- 
ber of Deputies, by a vote of 333 to 225, 
passed the electoral reform bill after 
restoring in modified form the clause 
providing for proportional represen- 
tation, the rejection of which by the 
Senate last March caused the overthrow 
of the Briand Ministry. 

Other changes in the bill were intro- 
duced, notably a clause that the number 
of deputies to be elected shall be fixed 
according to the number of registered 
electors, instead of according to popu- 
lation. This will have the effect of re- 
ducing the number of deputies from 597 
to 520, and will greatly benefit the coun- 
try districts at the expense of the cities. 

Although the bill as voted by the 
Chamber may not be altogether accept- 
able to the Senate, it is believed it will 
prove a basis for a compromise. 



Holland and Denmark. 

In Holland a Royal Commission has 
been appointed to consider the appli- 
cation of proportional representation in 
that country. 

In Denmark a committee consisting 
of fifteen members from each of the 
Houses of Parliament has been en- 
trusted with the task of examining the 
different systems of proportional rep- 
resentation with a view to the further 
application of the principle in Denmark. 
As many of our readers know, it was 
a Dane, Herr Andrae, who first pro- 
posed the "single transferable vote," 
which was independently proposed by 
Thomas Hare in England two years 
later and which has become famous as 
the "Hare system." This system, as 
worked out by Herr Andrae, has been 
used since 1855 for the election of part 
of the Upper House of the Danish 
Parliament. 



The Progress of P. R. 

International Gathering in London. 

A CONQUERING CAUSE. 

[Reprinted from The Manchester Guardian.] 
A great international gathering of the 
friends of Proportional Representation 
was held December 3d at the Holborn 
Restaurant in London. It was thought 
by the promoters, the Proportional Rep- 
resentation Society, that the question 
amongst ourselves had arrived at a 
stage which invited illustrative discus- 
sion on the part of all interested in the 
movement, whether abroad or at home, 
and they accordingly invited to join 
them representatives of all the Euro- 
pean movements for better systems of 
representation. About 500 men and 
women were present. 

The President of the Society (the 
Rt. Hon. Earl Grey) was in the chair, 
and among others present were the Rt. 
Hon. Lord Courtney, the Rt. Hon. 
F. E. Smith, M. P., Mr. Philip Snowden, 
M. P., Sir John Simon, M. P., M. 



48 



Equity 



Charles Benoist (chairman of the 
French Electoral Reform group), Count 
Goblet d'Alviella (Vice-President of the 
Belgian Senate), M. Georges Lorand 
(Belgian House of Representatives), 
Dr. Horace Micheli (Switzerland), M. 
Arthur Groussier (Paris), M. Louis 
Franck (Belgium), Mr. Harold Cox, 
Professor Hamel (Holland), Herr Carr 
Cohn (Hamburg), Sir C. A. Cripps, 
M. P., Mr. C. B. Harmsworth, M. P., 
Mr. T. Lough, M. P., Sir F. Pollock, Sir 
G. Scott Robertson, M. P., Mr. G. M. 
Trevelyan, Sir W. Anson, M. P., Mr. 
W. C. Anderson (Independent Labour 
party), Mrs. H. Fawcett, Sir John 
McCall (Tasmania), Sir Felix Schuster, 
and Mr. Alec Wilson (Belfast). 

After dinner the President said the 
size and representative character of the 
assembly indicated in a manner that 
could not fail to impress the public 
opinion not only of this but of other 
countries that there was a growing con- 
viction among the thinking men of Eu- 
rope that that form of government 
which represented local majorities only 
was not suited to democratic require- 
ments. "It is," he said, "because the 
experience of nearly every country pos- 
sessing representative institutions has 
proved that the system of representing 
local majorities only tends to establish 
privileged classes of electors, to rob a 
large group of the electors of the repre- 
sentation to which their numbers en- 
title them, and to hand over the govern- 
ment of the country into the keeping of 
expensively organized and selfish inter- 
ests, that the revolt against the major- 
ity system of representation is becom- 
ing so widespread and determined." — 
(Cheers.) It was not the principle of 
representative government that was 
at fault, but only the manner of its 
application. He should be surprised 
if what their distinguished foreign 
guests had to tell them did not 
strengthen and fortify them in the de- 
termination not to rest until in the name 



of justice, liberty, and good government 
we have succeeded in securing the appli- 
cation of the principle of P. R. to the 
electoral system of this country. — 
(Cheers.) 

In addition to countries directly rep- 
resented at the gathering, added Lord 
Grey, there were other countries where 
the interest in P. R. was not less 
marked. In the letter of good wishes 
from Italy the hope was expressed that 
this international banquet would prove 
to be the germ of an international move- 
ment from which the friends of propor- 
tional representation in all countries 
might draw vigour, authority, and per- 
severance from their national cam- 
paigns for securing electoral justice and 
the justification of politics. In all parts 
of the British Empire the movement in 
favour of proportional representation 
was gathering weight, dignity, and mo- 
mentum. In calling on Lord Courtney 
the President asked the assembly to give 
him a reception to which his long serv- 
ice to the cause and his high character 
so richly entitled him. 

Lord Courtney's Optimism. 

Lord Courtney, who was received 
with loud cheering, proposed "the 
Cause." He said that their claim was 
that proportional representation rested 
on the fundamental principles of liberty 
and of self-government. Its aim was to 
give the Government of a country to 
an assembly where the dominant 
voice should govern yet no voice be 
suppressed. Hindrances and obstacles 
they must recognize, but they could not 
abate the certainty of ultimate victory. 
There was a terrible torpor which be- 
set us all, depriving us so early of the 
power of learning a new lesson. There 
was also that most insidious effect of 
interest that made us more than content 
with institutions under which we had 
come to be what we are. There was 
further the pitiful timidity which shrank 
from contemplating change, asking how 



Proportional Representation Review 



49 



the world could go on if the things of 
to-morrow were to be arranged differ- 
ently from to-day. These forces^ were 
strong. But the world moved. There 
was the eternal succession of youth. 
That great majority which was so apa- 
thetic was also in the main disinter- 
ested, and could be quickened by per- 
sistent effort to shake itself free from 
the encumbrances of old habit. "So," 
said Lord Courtney, "I say to all : Do 
not despair. Our hopes may be de- 
ferred, our efforts thwarted, our march 
checked. But it is not to extinction that 
a movement among so many nations is 
advancing. — (Cheers.) As time passes 
position after position is gained, and 
there are signs that the day is not far 
off when men will wonder that a re- 
form so simple and so just should have 
been so long delayed. — (Cheers.) Some 
may think I have been too bold. But I 
would ask leave to be still bolder. I 
would not needlessly tread on sup- 
pressed fires, but does not the vision of 
the complete representation of a nation 
within its governing assembly give us 
an assurance of a peaceful development 
of the national life, however fierce and 
opposed may be the forces within it?" 
— (Cheers.) 

Why P. R. Has Become Necessary. 

M. Charles Benoist, a member of the 
Institute of France and president of the 
Parliamentary group for electoral re- 
form and proportional representation, 
responded, and said in France they had 
been on the point of introducing into 
the law that representation of minori- 
ties whose principle years ago was first 
formulated scientifically in England. He 
asked — Was not proportional represen- 
tation everywhere a necessary conse- 
quence and result of the force of cir- 
cumstances? Was it not the inevitable 
form of Parliamentary government with 
three or more parties, just as the repre- 
sentation of the majority alone — or 
rather of majorities differing according 



to situation, multiform and fragmentary 
local majorities — was the formula of 
Parliamentary government with two 
parties? As long as two parties alone 
were rivals for popular favour, and as 
long as those two parties were separated 
from each other by intellectual contro- 
versies rather than by the conflicts of 
daily life, the old form, the classical 
form, of Parliamentary government — the 
representation of local majorities with 
majority and minority confronting one 
another in Parliament as chance might 
order it — this rudimentary representa- 
tion was almost sufficient. But the ar- 
rival of a third or fourth party, he said, 
had changed all the rules of the game. 
With such a party proportional repre- 
sentation had become a necessity. 

Mr. P. Snowden, M. P., assured the 
foreign guests that though the move- 
ment in some other countries was more 
advanced than in England, yet in no 
other country was its progress more 
rapid than here at the present moment. 
He believed the party which he repre- 
sented [the Labour Party] would gain 
enormously from the adoption of the 
system. The toast was also responded 
to by M. Georges Lorand (Belgian 
House of Representatives), Mr. Alec J. 
Wilson (Vice-President of the Propor- 
tional Representation Society of Ire- 
land), and Herr Carl Cohn (Ham- 
burg). 

Testimony From Belgium. 

M. Georges Lorand said he belonged 
to the Radical wing of the Liberal party, 
but on that occasion he spoke on behalf 
of all the political parties of his coun- 
try. "We have used P. R.," he said, 
"for thirteen years in Belgium, and 
we have had six general elections with 
the new system, and the result is 
that not a single party, nor a frac= 
tion of a party, is opposed to the re= 
form; its extension is inscribed in the 
programme of all parties. It is cer= 
tain that the system of P. R. in Bel= 
gium will never be changed, save for 



50 



Equity 



the purpose of rendering it more 
complete, more just, and more pro= 
portional. It had been said by the op- 
ponents of the P. R. that it would lead 
to the splitting of parties, but it has had 
the opposite effect; parties, far from 
splitting into fragments, have brought 
their ranks closer together. Another 
benefit of the P. R. for the country has 
been not only that all parties are repre- 
sented in Parliament and in the great 
municipalities, but that they are repre= 
sented by their ablest men and lead= 
ers, whilst under the former majority 
system prominent men, such as Paul 
Jansen, passed half their lives outside 
the House in consequence of the haz- 
ards of the ballot. Parliamentary life 
has consequently greatly gained in 
authority. And perhaps the principal 
benefit of the reform has been that the 
political life which has been intensi= 
tied everywhere has also been puri= 
fled, the weapons employed being gen- 
erally more courteous and more digni- 
fied." 

Mr. A. Wilson (Belfast), Vice-Presi- 
dent of the Belfast Branch of the P. R. 
Society of Ireland, remarked that the 
whole principle of minority representa- 
tion was ignored by the framers of the 
Home Rule Bill, and the Irish branch 
protested actively against this omission. 
By deputations and the like they had ob- 
tained the recognition of the principle 
by the Government in the bill, and the 
decision on their amendment resulted in 
the largest majority that had ever been 
recorded in any division for any part 
of the bill.— (Cheers.) 

Mr. F. E. Smith. 

The Rt. Hon. F. E. Smith, K. C, 
M. P., who proposed the toast of "The 
Visitors," said the movement was just 
and inevitable. The concession that there 
should be a Second Chamber in Ireland 
under the Home Rule Bill recruited un- 
der the policy of proportional represen- 
tation was a remarkable tribute to the 



cause in Ireland whether the Home 
Rule Bill became law or not. Propor- 
tional representation would be of great 
gain to the country as a whole. He 
would not deal with sections or parties. 
He would not weigh in a nice balance 
whether it would result in advantage to 
one party or another. But his conclu- 
sion was that it was vital to the pros- 
perity of the country and the reputa- 
tion of the House of Commons that a 
more exact correspondence should exist 
between the people and the House of 
Commons, which claimed to represent 
the people, than existed to-day. He 
agreed that, on the whole, the best sys- 
tem of government for citizens in any 
country depended on the consent and 
approval of the people taken as a whole. 
But there were few arguments to de- 
fend a spurious democracy. The whole 
basic argument of government by de= 
mocracy imperatively demanded the 
mathematical representation of the 
people who elected it. — (Applause.) 

The toast was responded to by Count 
Goblet d'Alviella (Vice-President of the 
Belgian Senate), Dr. Horace Micheli 
(member of the Swiss National P. R. 
Committee), and M. Arthur Groussier 
(Socialist Deputy for Paris). 

M. A. Groussier said that whatever 
might be the different modifications of 
the "majority system," not only did it 
not allow a fair and complete represen- 
tation of the electoral body, but often it 
belied its own definition and allowed a 
minority to overcome a majority. "With 
you in Great Britain," he said, "elec- 
tions are decided by a single ballot, and 
the candidate with the largest number of 
votes is declared elected. The majority 
of electors in a constituency has only 
to divide itself into two bodies each 
with a candidate and the seat is in dan- 
ger of falling to the minority. The sec- 
ond ballot which is used in Continental 
countries might seem a sufficient cor- 
rective, but its shortcomings are already 
obvious. When three parties exist in a 



Proportional Representation Review 



51 



constituency, and after long efforts one 
of these finds it impossible to obtain 
representation, that party tends more 
and more to falsify the results of the 
election, especially at the second ballot, 
either openly or more discreetly, ac- 
cording to what it believes to be its in- 
terest. The action may either have an 
avowed motive, or it may be the conse- 
quence of bargains which are kept secret 
from the electorate. It is not only the 
majority of a nation, nor even, to speak 
more accurately, the majority of the 
electors in each constituency, that ought 
to be represented in Parliament : minori- 
ties, all minorities, the whole body, the 
universality of citizens ought to be rep- 
resented. I agree that the majority of 
the electors in a constituency should get 
the majority of the seats; but that 
minorities should be wholly excluded 
from the legislative assembly is entirely 
inadmissible. All citizens ought to have 
an equal right not only to vote but also 
to be represented." 



A Protest. 
Article II of the original constitution 
of the League read as follows: 

"Object. Its object shall be to promote the 
reform of legislative assemblies by abandoning 
the present system of electing single repre- 
sentatives from limited territorial districts by 
a majority or plurality vote, and by substitut- 
ing the following: 

"1. All representatives shall be elected at 
large, on a general ticket, either without dis- 
trict divisions, or in districts as large as 
practicable. 

"2. The election shall be in such form that 
the respective parties, or political groups, shall 
secure representation in proportion to the num- 
bers of votes cast by them respectively." 

In the proposed new constitution re- 
cently sent to members of the League 
in a circular letter, this article was made 
to read as follows: 

"Its object shall be to secure the adoption of 
proportional representation for state legisla- 
tures, city councils, and other deliberative or 
policy-determining bodies. The plan of pro- 
portional representation to be recommended by 
either of the League's secretaries in any par- 
ticular case shall be that which seems to him 
most _ suitable for the case, provided always 
that it embodies the principle of a single vote 
in a multiple-membered district." 

In respect to this proposed change 
one valued member of the League, Mr. 



Carl D. Thompson, 111 North Market 
Street, Chicago, writes as follows : "I 
vote No on Art. II — the old article is 
much clearer and more consistent. Your 
amended article cuts the heart out of the 
idea of proportional representation and 
makes your League absurd. Propor- 
tional representation presupposes po- 
litical parties and party grouping as pro- 
vided by article II, section 2, of your 
original constitution. I vote to retain 
the original article II and its two sec- 
tions. I would like my protest against 
this amended article published if pos- 
sible. The rest is satisfactory." 

Part of my reply to this letter from 
Mr. Thompson is as follows : "Article II 
of the proposed new constitution was 
not intended to imply that proportional 
representation should not distribute rep- 
resentatives among the several parties 
in proportion to the number of votes 
cast by each; it was changed partly to 
emphasize the point that proportional 
representation is suitable only for de- 
liberative or policy-determining bodies, 
and particularly to avoid the impli- 
cation, contained in the paragraph '2' 
of the old article II, that proportional 
representation necessarily involves and 
is based on party divisions. I am aware 
that you, as a Socialist, believe that party 
lines, such as have hitherto prevailed 
in this country, are the only reasonable 
basis for a system of representation. 
Though you may be right in that view, 
there is no question, I think, but that 
proportional representation is entirely 
feasible without such party lines as we 
have been accustomed to. It seemed to 
me right, therefore, for article II of our 
constitution to be so phrased as to cover 
the principle of proportional repre- 
sentation itself, regardless of whether 
or not it should be carried out by a 
system of recognizing parties as now 
constituted. I earnestly hope that you 
will not misinterpret the reason for my 
holding a different view from your own 
on this point. I should be unwilling to 



52 Equity 

help any movement that would prevent Arthur H. Thomas $5.00 

... . . , . . Daniel S. Remsen 5.00 

citizens from acting together in parties, Mrs. L. B. Riley 3.00 

but on the other hand I should be equally f rs d \ u J pen L t ° h e a !? h [ 1 1 ; : | : | 1:88 

unwilling to oppose a system of repre- T. F. Thieme 10.00 

L . xl _ ,. , . x ,-rr u -r J- A. Roebling 50.00 

sentation that made it difficult, if not Moorfield Storey 10 00 

almost impossible, for a voter to make k£*uSfi% ^ a e n ? k ;;;; 18:88 

his ballot count duly towards the R. W. Weeks 6.00 

, £ .. . A Mrs. T. Scattergood 50.00 

make-up of the representative body A. G. Scattergood 5.00 

whether he wanted to associate himself fesS' War^n^f ! ! ! ! ! ! * '. ! 900 

with any previously existing political William Hoag .... — 25.00 

* t 1/1 • «.u t L u o4 . c - G - Hoa e 10 0-00 

party or not. I believe that the best $360.00 

way to keep party names from being ^^Slp*?^* 1 * 6 * 31 * mem ' 

captured by the unscrupulous, to keep Rev. C. F. Dole $2.00 

£ ' r •«• • j r . Philadelphia Friend of the 

parties from fossilizing and from get- Cause 365.30 

ting out of touch with the people them- N c^ 01 * *' rienc * of ' ** 2 o 00 

selves, to keep uppermost in each party W. E. BoyAton!! '.'.'.'.'.'. '.'.'.'. 3.50 

the persons and the forces that should £ Q^HoSf!!??: 1 1 '. 1 1 \ \ \ loaoo 

control it, and to make it easy for new _, , , , , ,, s 29-£2 

_ Proceeds from sale of pamphlets.... 21.70 

interests and truths to find effective Sales of Mr. Humphreys' books 21.05 

voice in our political life is to substitute »T%£'£jS2 A J*j££*lSl 

for official recognition of political par- * hi rd trips of C. G. H. to Ohio in 

, , . , , , February and March, except those 

ties a means by which the people can paid by Cleveland Charter Commis- 

group themselves on old party lines, new A ^ °J nt ' ■ ^ ■ •£ ■ Cleveland ' Charter 88 ' 8 ° 

party lines, or even no party lines, as Commission to cover railroad fares 

., „ , , Tr T • 1 , . of C. G. H. for Cleveland trip to 

they really want to. If I am right in address that Commission on Febru- 

this view that in the long run freedom unified ' contribution: '. \ '. '. \ '. '. '. '. ! 2S ds 

rather than the official recognition of — 

$1 201 90 

parties is the best guaranty fc truly Expenditures. 

democratic government, I earnestly hope office^expenses ■ '. '■ '• '■ • '• '• ' '• '• '• '. '• •' - '• • '. '• '. $1 75^6 

that you will soon adopt the same view." Rent of office 33.33 

~ -, „ Rent of typewriter 30.00 

U. Vjr. MOAG. Stenographic work. 201.62 

Copies of Humphreys' book and lit- 
erature of (English) P. R. Society 

Financial Statement. for sale 29.63 

t? n • ■ 4- u- j. £ i.i n Duty on Humphreys' books, English 

following is a statement of the finan- literature, etc. . .... 3.98 

ces of the League for the year ending £ H ■ Sickier Company, for printing 101.15 

° J & The American City, for 10,000 copies 

October 1, 1913. This statement includes of Pamphlet No. 2 77.00 

the receipts and the expenditures of both R h J ds Eme ^'. . f °f. ^f m . }*T. 6 . 75 

treasurers. Lists of addresses 15.75 

,_ , . ' , , , „ , Mimeographing 62.62 

To do its work adequately for the year Copies of The Public of June 13, 

ending October 1, 1914, the League c^' il^*im^^ 1&' Si- 2 ' 5 ° 

should be able to spend about $1,800 or _ tnbution ........................ 36.06 

/K _ . _ _ . ,, , , ' . . , For publication of P. R. Review in 

$2,000. All persons who believe in the Equity, four issues 60.15 

objects for which the League stands are °?^^S^SSlX£!?*:* 1.65 

invited to become members of the League Clipping _ Bureau service 10.45 

., . ,.-,___ Commission on cheques .30 

and to support Its work. C G. HOAG. Subscription to Toronto Municipal 

Improvement Association 1.00 

Financial Statement. Beard's Digest, addition .92 

_ ■ ,„„„ _ Expenses of C. G. H.'s trip to Roch- 

October 1, 1912, to October 1, 1913. ester, Buffalo, Erie and Ohio, 1912 65.30 

"RoroiM* Expenses of C. G. H.'s trip to Bos- 

. M " ec f*P ts - ton, December, 1912 12.55 

Balance on hand October 1st $108.77 Expenses of C. G. H.'s 2d and 3d 

Membership fees 52.30 trips to Ohio, January and Febru- 

Donations. including member- a ry, except those paid by Cleveland 

ship fees: Charter Commission 88.80 



The Short Ballot Department 



53 



Railroad fares to Cleveland for ad- 
dress of February 27th, oaid by 
Cleveland Charter Commission. . . . 

Balance on hand 



$25.30 
98.11 



$1,201.90 
Robert Tyson, 
C. G. Hoag, 

Treasurers. 



Dear Dr. Taylor: — You certainly publish a 
very useful as well as stimulating magazine. 
Let me congratulate you on the yeoman serv- 
ice you are rendering. 

Arthur N. Holcombe, 
[Member of Massachusetts Minimum 
Wage Commission.] 



THE SHORT BALLOT DEPARTMENT. 

Edited by H. S. Gilbertson, executive secretary of The National Short Ballot Organization, 
383 Fourth Avenue, New York City. 
Officers of the Short Ballot Organization: President, Woodrow Wilson. Vice- 
Presidents, Winston Churchill; Horace E. Deming; Ben B. Lindsey; William S. U'Ren; 
William Allen White; Clinton Rogers Woodruff; Jchn Mitchell, Mt. Vernon, N. Y. Advisory 
Board, Lawrence F. Abbott, Richard S. Childs, Henry Jones Ford, Norman Hapgood, Woodrow 
Wilson. Secretary and Treasurer, Richard S. Childs. Executive Secretary, H. S. Gilbertson. 



Short Ballot Movement in New York. 

The Short Ballot idea received its 
greatest impetus in New York State 
when, on December 5th, the Republican 
conference in New York City adopted 
a resolution, couched in very definite 
terms, supporting the application of the 
principle to the state government. This 
action assured the support of the party 
in the next legislature for a constitu- 
tional amendment which would vest the 
appointment of the principal admin- 
istrative state officers (the comptroller, 
the attorney-general, the state treasurer, 
the secretary of state and the state 
engineer and surveyor) in the Governor. 
This follows the line of advance laid 
down in California, Iowa and Ohio, and 
may be called the orthodox measure as 
applied to state government. 

Governor Hughes at the very outset 
of the Short Ballot movement recom- 
mended such a step, but his influence, 
though great, was insufficient to com- 
mit the party. Last year, however, the 
Progressive forces not only incorpo- 
rated the Short Ballot principle in their 
state platform, but prepared and sub- 
mitted in the legislature a definite meas- 
ure and supported it with a pamphlet 
which was widely circulated. In the 
Democratic party the proposal now has 
at least the passive support of Gov- 
ernor Glynn, who, in calling the atten- 
tion of the legislature to the necessity 
for a constitutional convention at an 
early date, pointed to the general senti- 



ment for Short Ballot reform as one of 
the chief reasons for action. 

These developments have a particu- 
lar significance at this time, inasmuch 
as the system of direct primaries, 
coupled with the Massachusetts ballot, 
has been adopted by the hold-over leg- 
islature. Careful students of electoral 
conditions see quite clearly that the 
maximum benefits to be derived from 
these new electoral reforms will not 
be enjoyed by the people without the 
simpler conditions supplied under the 
Short allot. Until the latter is in effect 
the function of the Massachusetts form 
of ballot will be principally that of 
demonstrating to the voter precisely 
how much or how little he knows about 
each of the candidates. As for the 
direct primary, the difficulties of the 
long ballot are quite the same, if not 
even more aggravated, when the voter 
makes his choice of candidates within the 
party as when he makes his final choice. 

But the party program in New York 
is not as yet as broad as that of the 
leaders in the Short Ballot movement : 
the Executive Committee of the New 
York Short Ballot Organization. This 
body, now that its original proposal is 
in seemingly good hands, has broad- 
ened its interest to include attention to 
the county and judiciary problems. 



The County Problem. 

The county problem in New York 
State is more serious than most citi- 



54 



Equity 



zens realize. In fact, a very serious 
phase consists of this very lack of 
recognition. Within the last few years 
the administration of county affairs, at 
rather widely separated points, has been 
brought dramatically, but temporarily, 
to the attention of the public. When 
Martin H. Glynn was Comptroller, one 
of his greatest services to the state was 
his general raking over of the boards 
of supervisors, county treasurers and 
superintendents of the poor in about 
five counties. The method of conduct- 
ing public business in these places was 
unspeakably bad. In one county where 
maladministration had about run its 
course, the board of supervisors had 
practically abdicated its functions to an 
unbonded clerk, who proceeded to pay 
out the county funds with no other 
audit or sanction than his own sweet 
will. An investigation into his affairs 
led this official finally to suicide. 

Work of a far more constructive sort 
is now being done by some of the 
same men in the Comptroller's office, 
whose investigations several years ago 
led to numerous indictments. Also an 
exceedingly useful work is being con- 
ducted in the large county of West- 
chester by the Bureau of Research in 
Westchester County. 

The secretary of this Bureau, in a 
recent address, gave what seems to be 
a description of typical conditions in 
the counties of New York State, when 
he made this summary of his findings: 

Complex and confusing masses of leg- 
islation affecting the different com- 
munities in varying degrees. 

Inadequate, unsatisfactory and waste- 
ful taxation systems. Two hundred and 
twelve paid tax officials performing the 
work of ten. Ten expert men for 
salaries of from five thousand down to 
fifteen hundred a year would have per- 
formed that work much more efficiently 
and gotten the taxes collected with a 
very much smaller residuum of arrears 
to be collected by sale than these 212, 
who didn't know very much about it 
except how the other fellow had done 
it before them. 



Inadequate and antiquated systems of 
accounting for public funds. 

Violations, evasions, misrepresenta- 
tions and neglect of the laws, by pub- 
lic officials — many of such irregularities 
unintentional, because the men did not 
know they were violating the law. 

Unnecessary sickness and needless 
deaths from preventable diseases, due 
to inadequate sanitary inspection and 
control. 

Waste and extravagance in many ad- 
ministrative departments. 

Capable officials compelled to depart 
from or very freely interpret the law, 
or even to obtain special legislation to 
enable them to achieve efficient and 
economical service. 

Realizing the growing importance of 
the whole subject of county govern- 
ment, the New York Short Ballot Or- 
ganization has organized a series of 
conferences during the present winter, 
at which various phases of county gov- 
ernment will be discussed and the men 
who have special information on par- 
ticular subjects will be invited to ad- 
dress the members. One very success- 
ful meeting has already been held. The 
conference will devote considerable dis- 
cussion to actual legislation to be intro- 
duced during the coming winter. 

The constructive problem in New 
York State presents itself somewhat 
in this way: In the first place, the con- 
stitution blocks any thoroughgoing Short 
Ballot reform by a requirement that 
the county clerk, the district attorney, 
the sheriff and the register must be 
elective officers. It is probable, there- 
fore, that one measure to be promoted 
in the near future will be a constitu- 
tional amendment which will permit the 
legislature to determine whether or not 
these county officers shall be elective 
or appointive. In this way it will be 
legally possible to secure the passage of 
alternative simplified forms of county 
organization, any one of which may be 
adopted by the people of the county 
by a referendum vote. 

But even under the constitution as it 



The Short Ballot Department 



55 



stands, there is possible a certain meas- 
ure of Short Ballot reform, and what 
is perhaps equally important, the greater 
unification of the official organization. 
New York is one of those few states 
in which the county is organized on 
the basis of the township plan of local 
government. The governing body of 
the county which is responsible for the 
general financial management of its 
affairs, is composed of the supervisors 
of the various towns. In large counties 
like Westchester, Erie and Onondaga, 
the board of supervisors on this basis 
is an unwieldy body which has no 
continuous and intimate connection with 
the various county officers. It is this 
fact, perhaps, more than anything else, 
which explains the difficulties pointed 
out by Mr. Cartwright. No county 
officer really represents the unity of the 
county. 

To remedy this condition it is pro- 
posed to present a bill providing for 
an optional form of county organi- 
zation, in which the governing body 
will consist of a board of three super- 
visors elected at large. In order to 
give this board a point of contact with 
the rest of the organization, provision 
will be made for a county manager to 
act under their direction, who will ap- 
point the superintendents of the poor 
and the county treasurer. Later on, if 
the constitutional amendment is passed, 
still greater appointing power may be 
conferred upon this officer, who will 
also be purchasing agent and budget 
commissioner and exercise in general 
the range of functions conferred upon 
the city manager in the cities organized 
under the new system. 



The Judiciary. 

Sentiment in New York State is 
hardly ripe for an appointive judiciary. 
Nevertheless, a method has been de- 
vised which it is believed will secure 
the combined advantages of the elect- 
ive and an appointive system. That 



is to say, the original nomination will 
be lodged where the candidates can 
be made subject to careful selection and 
the people will retain the power of veto 
upon a bad nomination. Under this sys- 
tem a given number of petitioners will 
have the power to place any qualified 
person in nomination for any judicial 
office. If the plan were to stop at this 
point, however, it would be practically 
equivalent to selecting at random. For, 
if the spirit of the law were carried 
out, no one would be responsible for 
a thorough examination into the quali- 
fications of the candidates. 

It is therefore proposed to impose 
upon the Governor, some weeks prior 
to the date set for the making of 
nominations by petition, the duty of 
submitting to the Secretary of State the 
name of a candidate for each judicial 
office. These designations would be 
placed on the ballot under the words 
"recommended by the Governor." The 
Governor's candidates then would have 
a certain prestige over those nominated 
by petition, and unless there were some 
excellent reason to the contrary, nomi- 
nations by petition would be discour- 
aged. Upon the Governor would rest 
the responsibility for selecting the kind 
of judges which the best judgment of 
the people would approve, and the peo- 
ple would always have a power anal- 
ogous to the referendum to reject un- 
desirable candidates. 



Growth of the City Manager Plan. 

The City Manager plan of municipal 
government bids fair to break the record 
among the progressive movements for 
its rapid growth in popular favor. Much 
credit is due to the city of Dayton for 
bringing this new system to the at- 
tention of the people. Like Des Moines, 
this city has refused to hide its light 
under a bushel, but more than that, it 
has given a practical demonstration to 
the country of its escape from the grasp 
of machine politics. 



56 



Equity 



The particular incident which demon- 
strates this fact is the selection of the 
first city manager on the basis, appar- 
ently, of pure merit. This position was 
awarded to Mr. H. M. Waite, city 
engineer of Cincinnati. He had had no 
political or social connections in Day- 
ton and his sole recommendation for 
the Dayton post was his long experi- 
ence in the administration of private 
business corporations and his success- 
ful public record in Cincinnati. The 
absence of any residence requirement 
in most of the city manager charters 
and the fact that the commissions seem 
disposed to carry out the spirit of the 
plan in this respect is one of the most 
hopeful features of the city manager 
plan. Within the past month city 
manager charters have been adopted in 
Amarillo and Terrell, Texas, and in 
Manistee and Cadillac, Mich. The two 
Texas cities came from the ranks of 
commission government. The charter 
commission now at work in Salem, 
Ore., is committed to the city manager 
plan. 

The Ohio Defeat. 

Official returns of the vote on the 
Short Ballot amendments in Ohio show 
the following vote : 

For the state amendment, 233,153; 
against, 447,493. 

For the county amendment, 213,865 ; 
against, 436,739. 

The heaviest majority against the 
amendments, as was expected, was cast 
in the rural counties. It was to them 
that the state officials chiefly directed 
their campaign. The Short Ballot forces, 
on the other hand, directed most of 
their energies to the city voters ; and 
where it was possible to secure effective 
publicity, the amendments carried by 
substantial majorities, as in Cuyahoga 
County (Cleveland), Lucas (Toledo) 
and Hamilton (Cincinnati). 

On November 10th the Ohio Short 



Ballot Committee issued this statement, 
which speaks for itself : 

The first short-ballot skirmish was 
lost on Tuesday : because the movement 
is new; the principle was misrepre- 
sented by office-holders and office-seek- 
ers, and the amendments, as submitted 
by the _ general assembly, were unfor- 
tunate in form. 

In counties where the cause was fully 
presented to the people it commanded 
satisfactory majorities. In Cuyahoga 
County it carried by a majority of 
29,000; in Hamilton by 7,000, and in 
Lucas by 3,000. 

The next contest will be on an initi- 
ated short-ballot amendment which will 
express just what the short-ballot advo- 
cates believe should be in the funda- 
mental law of Ohio. It will include: 

(a.) The appointment of state admin- 
istrative officers, who are lost sight of 
by the voter at the polls; the establish- 
ment of the cabinet system in state 
government, and the fixing of definite 
responsibility upon the Governor, whom 
the people can call to account every 
two years. 

(b.) Home rule for counties, making 
it possible for the legislature to pro- 
vide (with the approval of the voters) 
relief for populous counties from the 
present rigid, inefficient and expensive 
county government. 

(c.) Legislative districts; providing 
for the division of the more populous 
counties into as many representative and 
senatorial districts as there are repre- 
sentatives and state senators, so that 
each voter will be required to vote for 
only one state senator and one repre- 
sentative, instead of for eighteen in 
Cuyahoga, fifteen in Hamilton and six 
in Franklin County, as at present. 

Where the short ballot had one en- 
thusiastic supporter in Ohio three 
months ago it has a hundred to-day. Its 
reasonableness becomes apparent as men 
study its purpose. Its necessity grows 
more obvious as government becomes 
more complex. It is one of those vital 
reforms that thrives on defeat. The 
issue involved is "Shall intelligent vot- 
ing be made easy and simple in Ohio?" 
The restoration of representative gov- 
ernment is at stake. The men behind 
this constructive reform are not quit- 
ters. They are patient and steadfast 
men who are accustomed to the long 
look ahead. The fight has just begun. 

The Ohio Short Ballot Committee. 



Equity 

(Formerly Equity Series] 

Devoted to Improved Methods of Self-Gov eminent , as the Initiative, 
Referendum , Recall , Proportional Representation, Direct Primaries, the 
Preferential 'Ballot, the Short 'Ballot, etc., and the simplification and 
increased efficiency of Government in Municipalities, States and Nation. 



15 £n2 ££ c y oov Quarterly Philadelphia, April, 1914 



Contents 

EDITORIAL: Page 

To-day's Work and To-morrow's !>-*-«*-: ^ 

Coming Changes in State Government ?*%$' ** fiw^* • • • ^1 

Direct Nominations by Mail j&s, y^TTTT^V'^V ■ ^3 




THE INITIATIVE, REFERENDUM AND RECAl^ 

A Question of Terms y \i \*& }•• • • 65 

Government by Intelligence z\ nib ' '/ " " ^ 

*|K^=>Oi<r Two Leading Opponents — Ex-President tafj^ana President 

Lowell, of Harvard \&jjpt^. . 67 

Oregon Senator on Oregon t 77 

tfs&- U. S. Senators and the People 78 

Safeguarding Petitions Judson King 80 

THE MARCH OF POPULAR GOVERNMENT— Being a Quarterly Record 

of the Progress of Direct Legislation in the Various States 85 

Arkansas 85 .Massachusetts 00 North Carolina 07 

California 86 Michigan 02 Ohio 07 

Colorado S7 Mississippi 02 Oregon 00 

Delaware 87 Nebraska 03 Vermont 100 

Illinois 88 New Jersey 04 Virginia 100 

Indiana SS Now York 05 Washington 101 

Maryland 80 

The Referendum in Ulster 102 

Progress is Favored by Larger Powers to the Intelligent Electorate.. 102 

Italy Unified by the Referendum 104 

Judges for Life 104 

PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION REVIEW: 

C. G. Hoag, Editor 

Notes 105 

The Organization of the League 106 

Holland 107 

British Columbia — 107 

The Movement in France Georges Lachapelle 108 

H. G. Wells onP.R 109 

THE SHORT BALLOT DEPARTMENT: 

H. S. Gilbertson, Editor 

The Short Ballot in New York State HO 

The Conferences on County Government HI 

The Coroner HI 



Equity 

f Formerly Equity Series] 



Including the Direct Legislation Record, the Referendum News and the Proportional Representation Review. 

The purpose of this publication is to improve the machinery for self-government, to pro- 
mote honest and efficient government, and to place public affairs and public officials under direct 
final control of the electorate. The ideal is : That every American community— town, city and 
county — shall have the freest and simplest plan of self-government possible, resulting in the 
most efficient government possible : That every state shall have a short and simple constitution, 
fewer and better laws, and a more efficient government : That the National constitution shall be 
more easy to amend than at present, and that it shall be possible for the people of the Nation to 
express themselves definitely concerning National issues whenever they may wish to do so. 



Charles Fremont Taylor, Editor and Publisher 
Edwin S. Potter, Associate Editor 

1520 Chestnut St., Philadelphia, Pa. 



J. W. Sullivan, New York City 

Founder of the Direct Legislation Record 
Eltweed Pomeroy, Donna, Texas 

Former Editor of the Direct Legislation Record 
Geo. H. Shieley, Washington, D. C. 

Founder of the Referendum News 
W. S. U'Ren, Oregon 

Father of the "Oregon System" 
Senator Rob't L. Owen 

President of the National Popular Government League 
Dr. Wm. Preston Hill, St. Louis, Mo. 

Father of the Initiative and Referendum in Missouri 
Robert M. La Follette 

U. S. Senator from Wisconsin 
Judge Ben B. Lindsey, Denver, Colo. 
Dr. John Randolph Haynes, Los Angeles, Cal. 

Father of the Recall in California 
Dr. Wm. Draper Lewis, Philadelphia, Pa. 
Samuel Gompers 

President of American Federation of Labor 

Moses E. Clapp 

U. S. Senator from Minnesota 
Woodbridge N. Ferris 

Governor of Michigan 
George H. Hodges 

Governor of Kansas 



EDITORIAL COUNSELLORS 

George E. Chamberlain 



U. S. Senator from Oregon 
J. H. Ralston, Washington, D. C 
Delos F. Wilcox, New York 
L. F. C Garvin 

Ex-Governor of Rhode Island 
George W. Norris 

U. S. Senator from Nebraska 
Miles Poindexter 

U. S. Senator from Washington 
Morris Sheppard 

U. S. Senator from Texas 
Prof. Chas. Zueblin 

Publicist and Lecturer 
M. Clyde Kelley 

Member of Congress from Pennsylvania 
William Allen White 

Editor Emporia, Kan., Gaxette 
Frances Kellor 

Chief of Progressive National Service 

Carl Vrooman, Bloomington, 111. 

Lieut. C. P. Shaw, Virginia 

Geo. H. Duncan, New Hampshire 

James W. Bucklin, Grand Junction, Colo. 
Father of Grand Junction System of Preferential Voting 



Entered at the Philadelphia Post Office as Second-class Matter 



Single copies, 15 cents; 50 cents per year; three years, $1. To facilitate the spread of the causes represented 
by this magazine, four yearly subscriptions will be sent to different addresses for $1; special rates for yearly sub- 
scriptions or single numbers for propaganda purposes supplied on application. 



EDITORIAL 



Vol. XVI— No. 2 



April, 1914 



To-day's Work and To-morrow's. 

Down deep below the surface of life — 
underneath the daily round of work and 
play of all the millions of people com- 
prising this great modern republic of 
ours — there goes on with ever increas- 
ing speed and power an all-important, 
though not showy nor highly rewarded 
service to the nation. 

That service consists in the slow but 
sure extension or strengthening of the 
foundations on which may be reared the 
social and political superstructure of the 
future. 

Foundations consisting of the free and 
orderly and recognized processes for ex- 
pressing the intelligent purpose and will 
of the whole people and of its constitu- 
ent state, county and municipal units. 
Those processes are contained in the 
instrumentalities now universally known 
as the Initiative, Referendum and Recall. 
In the pages of Equity we aim to 
record the progress of this fundamental 
movement and to furnish ammunition 
for its advocates. What is its status and 
outlook at this time? 

In a relative sense, the present year 
cannot be expected to advance the I., 
R. and R. cause as much as next year. 
Less than one-quarter of the state legis- 
latures have been in session this year 
and some of these have been so far 
controlled by the forces of reaction that 
they have taken no steps along this path 
of progress. In 1915 more than forty 
legislatures will be in session and in 
several states constitutional conventions 
will be under way. Signs are not want- 
ing that these questions of responsive 
representative government will come to 
the front then. 

Nevertheless a number of highly im- 
portant advances in this direction for 



the present year are recorded in these 
pages. Briefly summarized, these re- 
sults are the following: 

Mississippi. — A very satisfactory 
amendment to the constitution of this 
state providing for the state-wide Initi- 
ative and Referendum was passed in 
March by the legislature and will be- 
come the law of the state if a majority 
of those voting at the regular election 
next November shall vote "y e s" on this 
proposition. The legislature also passed 
a law providing for the Initiative, Refer- 
endum and Recall in municipalities. A 
vigorous campaign already has been 
started in Mississippi for the amend- 
ment, and doubtless many of the cities 
and towns will be discussing changes 
in their form of government to include 
the I., R. and R. 

Maryland. — Here also a step has 
been taken in the right direction, al- 
though haltingly. The Ogden bill for 
the Initiative and Referendum, which 
was well prepared, was very badly mu- 
tilated by the senate before its final pas- 
sage. The initiative proposition was 
omitted, and an entirely new and original 
provision, giving cumulative numerical 
value to the signatures of members of 
the legislature on Initiative or Refer- 
endum petitions, was cut out. This idea 
is likely to receive favorable consider- 
ation in other states. The amendment as 
finally approved stands a very good 
chance of being adopted at the Novem- 
ber election, considering the generally 
favorable attitude of the voters as al- 
ready expressed in party conventions or 
committees. 

Ohio. — The lawmakers of the Buck- 
eye State in extra session have enacted 
a law throwing a number of safeguards 
about the operation of the I. and R. 
system, especially with reference to the 
signing of petitions and fixing heavy 
penalties for fraudulent perversions of 
the new processes. 

New York.— Although greatly changed 
in its political complexion and chastened 



60 



Equity 



in spirit by the progressive wave, the 
legislature at Albany was still sufficiently 
in the control of reactionary leaders not 
to take any definite action in favor of 
the Initiative and Referendum, and it 
was even deemed necessary by the 
friends of the optional city bill to omit 
the I., R. and R. features, which in its 
form last year had made that bill a 
model. Nevertheless an attempt to re- 
peal the bill providing for the consti- 
tutional convention election failed to go 
through. At this writing it appears 
from unofficial returns of the April 7th 
election that the convention proposal has 
carried by a substantial majority. The 
failure of appropriation bills at the regu- 
lar session makes necessary an extra ses- 
sion in May or June, at which' time fur- 
there results. will be possible. 

Massachusetts. — A powerful impetus 
was given to the proposal for the Initi- 
ative and Referendum, either through a 
special amendment or by provision for 
a constitutional convention, by Governor 
Walsh, first in his inaugural address and 
later by appearing in person before a 
committee of the legislature. The move- 
ment was already strong in the official 
councils of all parties and some decisive 
and favorable outcome is looked for be- 
fore the present session ends. 

Vermont. — A referendum election in 
Vermont on March 3d had the important 
result of adopting a preferential primary 
for the instruction of party delegates 
and a direct primary enabling voters to 
vote directly for candidates for local, 
state and municipal offices. 

Washington. — The election of Gill as 
mayor of Seattle on March 3d was the 
subject of widespread comment and 
some unfavorable criticism as to the 
operation of the Recall for the reason 
that Gill himself had been recalled be- 
fore the end of his previous term. An 
examination of the facts in the case 
shows clearly that the people of Seattle 
had their own reasons for giving this 
man another trial as the city's executive, 



and our political history is full of in- 
stances where men once elected to office 
have been defeated and then re-elected. 
The psychology of the matter is no dif- 
ferent in this case where an official was 
recalled before the end of his term. 

Oregon. — The people of this state, who 
for a number of years have been their 
own masters through the Initiative and 
Referendum, are to have the oppor- 
tunity to elect as their chief executive 
a man known throughout the country 
as the "father of the Oregon movement," 
William S. U'Ren. -He has announced 
his candidacy for governor as an Inde- 
pendent on a progressive platform. At 
the same election a number of important 
measures will be passed upon by the 
voters, among which will probably be a 
proposal to abolish the senate, and one 
to require proportional representation in 
the house. Petitions for these measures 
are in circulation, backed by the Feder- 
ation of Labor, several farmers' organ- 
izations and others. 

North Carolina. — State-wide stimulus 
has been given to the I. and R. move- 
ment by the series of formal debates in 
which teams from 150 high schools of 
North Carolina took part on March 20th, 
under the auspices of the University Ex- 
tension Bureau. It will be strange in- 
deed if the fruits of this discussion 
shall not be gathered at the next session 
of the legislature. 

Virginia. — Some real progress may 
be reported here, though definite action 
was deferred. At the legislative session 
just closed one of several I. and R. 
amendments up for consideration passed 
the house by a vote of 64 to 24. The 
less responsive senate failed to act. In 
the optional city charter law passed, 
there was no provision for the I., R. 
and R. As in New York, friends of 
the charter bill feared to jeopardize its 
passage by including these measures. In 
addition to this evidence of progress is 
the fact that a state convention of Demo- 
crats was held at Richmond to organize 



Editorial 



61 



a Progressive Democratic League. This 
convention, after hearing addresses by- 
Secretary Bryan, Senator Owen and 
others, resolved to begin a vigorous 
campaign for the Initiative and Refer- 
endum and other progressive measures. 
This makes it probable that the next 
state senate will be less reactionary. 

In Other States. — Signs of activity 
along this line are not wanting in many 
other parts of the country. In Indiana, 
which has been extremely backward until 
this year, the Democratic convention, 
though still in the hands of the old 
"bosses," was constrained through the 
influence of the administration to favor 
a direct primary system. Besides this, 
the educational forces began a state- 
wide propaganda for the Initiative and 
Referendum in anticipation of the con- 
stitutional convention, the calling of 
which is to be decided at the November 
election. 

Next door, in Illinois, the movement 
for a constitutional convention has 
grown apace. South Dakota will vote 
in November on the calling of a consti- 
tutional convention next year. Im- 
portant legislative decisions will be made 
in several states having the I. and R. 
in their fundamental law, such as pro- 
hibition in California, woman suffrage in 
Nebraska and the abolition of the state 
senate in Oregon. In Missouri the city 
of St. Louis has made a splendid start 
toward a liberal charter which will in- 
clude the I., R. and R. In Colorado, the 
city of Denver has forced, by means of 
a referendum election, a 20% cut in 
water rates. In Idaho, we hear of a 
concerted effort of the Grange, Feder- 
ation of Labor, Democratic, Socialist and 
Progressive parties, to bring forward a 
good I. and R. amendment before the 
next legislative session. 



Experts in government, with large au- 
thority, and governmental machinery 
providing for direct control by the 
voters, is the ideal. 



Coining Changes in State Government. 
We will soon enter upon an era of 
state constitutional revision. If the 
proposition for a constitutional conven- 
tion to be voted on in New York state 
April 7th shall carry,* New York will 
take the lead. In that event, the dele- 
gates will be elected at the November 
election of this year, and the convention 
will meet in April of next year. Un- 
fortunately the delegates will be elected 
at a regular election and on a partisan 
ballot. This will make the convention 
largely a partisan affair. What can we 
expect or hope for from such a con- 
vention? 

However, happily the Initiative, Refer- 
endum and Recall are not partisan mat- 
ters. For this reason we hope that these 
features will either be in the constitu- 
tion submitted, or be submitted as 
separate measures. Will such a con- 
vention provide a simplified state govern- 
ment, with a unicameral legislative 
branch, and a short ballot? We fear 
not, because politicians thrive on a com- 
plicated system of government; one not 
easily understood by the people, and be- 
yond the control of the people. For the 
last-named reason they will oppose the 
I., R. and R., unless they find that they 
will have to yield to popular demand. 
In the latter event, they will try to make 
the operation of these instrumentalities 
of popular control so difficult that they 
will be of little or no value to the people 
unless trained workers are on the ground 
to guide in the construction of the I., 
R. and R. features, thus avoiding all 
"jokers." 

As noted frequently in these columns, 
Indiana will vote next November on the 
proposition, "Shall there be a constitu- 
tional convention in 1915?" If carried, 
the delegates will be elected at a special 
election and on a nonpartisan ballot. 
These two features of the plan will 



♦Unofficial returns Wednesday morning, April 
8th, indicate that the proposition is carried by 
a majority of about 25,000 in a total vote of 
about 275,000. 



62 Equity 

conduce to wise selections of delegates. 
The convention will meet in May, 1915. 
However, in a state in which there is 
not a single commission-governed city 
or town, and in which the direct primary 
has just reached the party plank stage, 
what can we expect in the way of a 
progressive constitution? The people of 
Indiana are bright enough, but the poli- 
ticians and an archaic constitution have 
kept them back. Will the conditions 
above mentioned — delegates elected on a 
nonpartisan ballot at an independent 
election — produce a convention that will 
leap forward and make Hoosierdom the 
model progressive state? Will a simpli- 
fied plan of state government be pre- 
sented that will make Indiana less a 
political state, and a model for sim- 
plicity and efficiency in state govern- 
ment? 

As noted in October, 1913, Equity, 
page 227, the voters of South Dakota 
will also vote on the same question con- 
cerning a constitutional convention at 
the regular election next November. If 
the decision is favorable, the manner 
and time of electing the delegates, the 
date when the convention shall meet, 
and other details will be decided by the 
legislature next winter. South Dakota 
was the first state to put the Initiative 
and Referendum into its constitution. 
Will it be the first state to establish a 
legislature of a single house, a short 
ballot, etc.? We must wait and see, and 
we hope that the prospects are prom- 
ising. 

Sentiment is growing for a consti- 
tutional convention in Illinois, Massa- 
chusetts, Pennsylvania and a number of 
other states, but no definite steps have 
been taken yet. Let us hope that the 
conventions will not come too rapidly 
until some state actually adopts and puts 
into operation a good model state gov- 
ernment under a short and simple con- 
stitution. First among the essentials of 
such a model must be the instruments 
of control of public affairs by the 



electorate, upon the demand of a reason- 
able number of voters — the Initiative 
and Referendum; also the instrument 
for control of public officers by the 
electorate — the Recall, to be used at the 
option of the electorate. 

Perhaps the next essential is the Short 
Ballot — popular election of only a few 
of the leading officers, the other officers 
to be appointed by these few elected of- 
ficers, who are held responsible for the 
government, under pain of recall. This 
plan will give us simplicity in elections 
and efficiency of administration. 

The lawmaking machinery in our 
states should be made more simple and 
efficient. Two separate bodies, each too 
large for the purpose, and both com- 
posed chiefly or entirely of men un- 
trained and inexperienced in law- 
making, in comparatively short sessions, 
usually two years apart, is the ideal 
machinery for inefficiency and a crude 
product. Under these conditions it is 
a wonder that our states have gotten 
along as well as they have. What state 
will be the first to establish a legislature 
of a single house, composed of a small 
number of trained and efficient men, 
paid sufficiently well to justify them in 
giving their entire time to studying the 
needs of the state and with authority to 
promulgate a law whenever they shall 
discover a need for it? Such a radical 
change in the law-making machinery of 
a state could best be proposed by a con- 
stitutional convention, for a legislature 
that would propose it would be commit- 
ting suicide — and that is more unusual 
among political bodies than among indi- 
viduals. Governor Hodges, of Kansas, 
is working for what he calls a "short- 
ened legislature," but not by means of 
a constitutional convention, as the fol- 
lowing letter indicates: 

Topeka, February 6, 1914. 

My Dear Mr. Taylor: — I have your letter 
of January 20th and appreciate the same. We 
are not attempting to make the shortened legis- 
lature a political matter. I do not want to 



Editorial 



63 



handle it that way. In fact, I shall dis- 
courage its recommendation as a party meas- 
ure, rather feeling that it should be handled 
independently. 

We are getting along nicely in the situation 
and are making friends for the idea and I 
have been making quite a number of speeches. 
The speeches heretofore have been before busi- 
ness men's clubs, and at every place they 
seemed to be in full accord with the idea. 
Cordially yours, 

Geo. H. Hodges, 

Governor. 

There is another definite movement 
above the horizon that must not be lost 
sight of in this connection, and that is 
the U'Ren proposition in Oregon. This 
plan would establish a legislature of a 
single house in Oregon consisting of 50 
members — too many for a state of Ore- 
gon's population. We frequently hear 
the expression, "Abolish the state sen- 
ate" ; and Mr. U'Ren's plan is popularly 
called a plan to abolish the senate. It 
would be better to abolish both houses 
as at present constituted, and establish a 
single house in their place. If either 
house should be abolished, and the pres- 
ent house remain, the lower house is 
the one that should go in most if not in 
all the states, because it is too large for 
modern efficiency. The senate is the 
smaller and better selected body. But it 
need not be retained as it is. Mr. 
U'Ren's plan, proposed by the Initiative, 
will be voted on in Oregon in November 
of this year, and again Oregon may be 
the first to blaze the way. 

Later: Just before going to press we 
learn of important activities along this 
line in Colorado. Initiative petitions will 
soon be circulated for a plan of commis- 
sion form of state government drawn 
by Judge Ben Lindsey, of Denver. The 
leading features of the plan are these: 
The governor will be the only state offi- 
cer elected. He will appoint a "cabinet, 
somewhat similar to that of the Presi- 
dent of the United States." The gov- 
ernor will have great power, but he will 
be subject to the Recall. The laws are 
to be made by a Senate of 18 or 20 mem- 



bers. This plan, which we will give in 
greater detail in next Equity, is to be 
voted on in Colorado next November. 

Thus, two of the Initiative states, Ore- 
gon and Colorado, are in a fair way to 
get ahead of the states which have to 
move by the old-fashioned process of 
constitutional change, in the important 
movement for improvements in the proc- 
esses of state government. 



Direct Nominations by Mail. 

While it is true that the Socialist 
Party was the first political organization 
in the United States formally to advo- 
cate the Initiative and Referendum as 
instruments of legislation, Ithat party 
has never yet used the referendum prin- 
ciple in nominating its own candidates. 
This course has now been adopted by 
a mail referendum vote completed in 
January. The proposition carried by 
a vote of 4 to 1, according to Executive 
Secretary Lanfersiek, of the Socialist 
Party. 

Under this plan, the next national 
convention of the party will be held 
solely for the purpose of adopting a 
platform. The call for nominations will 
be issued on November 1st of the year 
preceding the national election. Forty 
days will be allowed for nominations, 
fifteen for acceptances and declinations 
and sixty ior the Referendum. 

Each nominee will have to receive ten 
or more nominations from ten or more 
locals before his name will be placed 
on the ballot. A majority ballot will 
be necessary to elect. 

In case no candidate receives a ma- 
jority on the first ballot, then the two 
names receiving the highest number of 
votes will immediately be submitted to 
a second Referendum, sixty days' time 
to be given for same. 



Lawmaking is a difficult process. 
"Raw" and inexperienced men elected 
to a state legislature, the term of which 



64 Equity 

will be limited to 60 or 90 days, or local 
politicians elected to a city council, 
should not be expected to possess high 
abilities as lawmakers; nor can they 
reasonably be expected to exercise the 
highest ethics in exercising powers 
greater than should be trusted to them, 
and duties beyond their abilities. The 
remedy is, legislative bodies composed 
of few members, these few being trained 
and experienced in the art of lawmaking, 
but whose acts are subject to control by 
the intelligence of the community by 
appropriate governmental machinery. 



Prof. Frank M. Anderson, of the 
University of Minnesota, suggests that 
a single, easy step will now enable the 
state of Minnesota to advance to the 
unique position of actual separation of 
national from state politics. That step 
is to amend the primary election law 
so as to transfer the state officials from 
the partisan to the non-partisan list. 
Parties would then be formed and re- 
formed exclusively on state issues. 
Here is a simple change in the electoral 
process which might effect a silent revo- 
lution in American politics. 



Publicity is the strongest link in the 
chain of processes by which the best 
popular government will be achieved. 
Hence the channel of information con- 
cerning a proposed or referred measure 
for the voters should be as free as 
possible from personal interest or special 
privilege of any kind. The official 
pamphlet, being a public document, free 
from personal or corporate influence, is 
the ideal channel of information con- 
cerning referred measures. 



With representation in government we 
have no quarrel. What we object to is 
misrepresentation. Our effort is to re- 



move misrepresentation. The best in- 
struments for this purpose ever devised 
are the Initiative, Referendum and 
Recall. 



The law of any community, to be 
effective, must express the will and in- 
telligence of a majority of the voters 
who express themselves on a given issue 
when the door of opportunity is open 
for all voters to do so. 



Not to destroy representative govern- 
ment for city, state or nation, but to 
make it more truly and more promptly 
responsive to the will of the people — 
that is the problem demanding solution. 



To make "representative government" 
represent the people, sooner or later we 
shall have to fix the privilege of final 
control of public affairs where it 
eternally belongs — with the people. 



The Initiative and Referendum permit 
the expression of the highest intelligence 
of the electorate, because they open wide 
the door of opportunity for expression to 
the entire electorate. 



Concentrated authority is essential to 
efficiency in government, but it is likely 
to become selfish and corrupt without 
diffusion of control — the possibility of 
direct control by the electorate. 

A Friendly Appreciation. 

"Leading the busy life that I am com- 
pelled to lead, I do not have time to read 
a great many periodicals that I know would 
not only be interesting but instructive. I 
always enjoy reading Equity, and only wish 
that I always had the time to read everything 
contained in it. I have never yet found an 
article that was not extremely interesting and 
almost always I gained information and in- 
struction therefrom." 

George W. Norris, 
United States Senator from Nebraska. 






The Initiative, Referendum and Recall 



65 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department. 

Continuing the Direct' Legislation Record, which was the first publication devoted to the 
Initiative and Referendum. It was started in New Jersey, in 1893, by J. W. Sullivan, as the 
organ for the National Direct Legislation League and various State Leagues. It was continued 
from 1894 to 1904 by Mr. Eltweed Pomeroy, and revived and included in Equity Series in 1906. 

Also continuing the Referendum News, formerly published in Washington, D. C, by Mr. 
Geo. H. Shibley, and consolidated with Equity Series early in 1907. 



A Question of Terms. 

Say Initiative and Referendum Rather 
Than Direct Legislation. 

When the propaganda for direct con- 
trol of public affairs by the electorate 
was begun in the early '90' s, the processes 
for such control by means of the Initi- 
ative and Referendum was frequently 
called Direct Legislation. The leagues 
then formed for advancing the propa- 
ganda were called Direct Legislation 
leagues. The publication started as the 
organ of the National Direct Legislation 
League was called the Direct Legisla- 
tion Record, which, as seen above, has 
been revived and is perpetuated as a 
department in Equity. 

However, our opponents, either 
through ignorance or design, have for 
some years past made it appear that 
we favor direct lawmaking by the 
electorate as a preference over indirect 
lawmaking by elected representatives. 
We do not favor direct legislation as a 
preference over indirect lawmaking by 
legislative bodies. We merely insist that 
the electorate shall reserve the power 
of direct action, for use whenever the 
results of the indirect method shall prove 
unsatisfactory. 

The instruments for direct action are 
the Initiative and the Referendum. These 
instruments in workable form make it 



possible for the voters to veto bad 
legislation, repeal bad laws, and make 
by direct action laws that they desire 
which the legislative body has neglected 
or refused to make. 

It is not proposed, expected nor de- 
sired that all the laws nor the bulk of 
legislation shall be made by direct action. 
In fact, the ideal is that the legislative 
body of a given community shall rep- 
resent the wishes of that community so 
perfectly that direct action by the voters 
thereof shall never be necessary. Even 
so, the power and the working machinery 
for direct action by the electorate should 
exist in the fundamental law of every 
community, as a primary right, as a 
safeguard against the possibility of mis- 
representation. 

In no American community where this 
primary right has been secured has more 
than one percent, of legislation enacted 
teen secured by direct action; and in 
most such American communities the 
proportion of legislation secured by di- 
rect action has been much less than one 
per cent., and in many such American 
communities the instruments for direct 
action (the Initiative and Referendum) 
have not been called into action at all. 
As Clinton Rodgers Woodruff said in 
Raleigh, N. C, March 10th, that the 
I., R. and R. are "more valuable in their 



66 



Equity 



existence than in their use. Their ex- 
istence impress a sterner sense of duty 
and keen thoughts of responsibility in 
the minds of officials." 

That is, when the Initiative and Refer- 
endum exist in workable form in a state 
constitution or in a city charter, they 
are inhibitory against corrupt and un- 
wise legislation, and promotive of legis- 
lation in the interest of the masses of 
the people. 

On account of the fact that our oppo- 
nents have misinterpreted (and still mis- 
interpret) the expression "Direct Legis- 
lation" to mean that we advocate all law- 
making by direct action rather than by 
legislative bodies, we have for several 
years past seldom used the expression 
"Direct Legislation" in the text of this 
magazine, preferring the use of the spe- 
cific terms Initiative and Referendum 
instead. We suggest that the workers 
in this movement everywhere follow this 
example, for the reason above given. 

Other reasons exist for this change in 
policy. The Initiative and Referendum 
are specifically what we want. It is 
always best to strive directly for the 
goal, and to use specific terms in doing 
so. Then we cannot be misunderstood, 
nor can our aims or efforts be misin- 
terpreted. 

Government by Intelligence. 

It is frequently claimed by our friends 
and workers that the exercise of the 
Initiative and Referendum is govern- 
ment by the majority; that it is "ma- 
jority rule." And our opponents point 
out that, constantly, fewer voters vote 
on measures than for candidates; that 
many voters show no interest in voting 



on measures; that many measures are 
adopted by less than a majority of the 
voters who go to the polls and vote for 
candidates; that this is minority rule 
instead of majority rule. This is one 
of their arguments against the Initi- 
ative and Referendum, unless a favor- 
able vote of a majority of the voters 
be required to carry a measure, instead 
of a majority voting on the proposition. 

Thus they would count all voters who 
fail to vote on the proposition against the 
proposition. Thus, to carry a proposition, 
it would be necessary to overcome all 
the ignorance and indifference in the 
electorate. The requirement that a pro- 
posed constitutional amendment shall re- 
ceive the favorable vote of a majority 
of "all the votes cast in the election" in 
order to be adopted, instead of a ma- 
jority of the votes cast thereon, existed 
in many of the old state constitutions, 
and still exists in some of them. For 
example, in Mississippi, in November, 
1912, an I. and R. constitutional amend- 
ment received a favorable vote of about 
two to one on the proposition, yet 
failed, because it did not receive a fa- 
vorable, vote of "all the votes cast in 
the election." This is chiefly what stands 
in the way of constitutional adjustment 
to modern conditions in Indiana; the 
old constitution, made in 1851, contain- 
ing this requirement. Other states could 
be mentioned, but this is sufficient to 
show the unwisdom of government by 
ignorance and indifference. This bond- 
age should, must and will be broken. 

The adoption of a proposition by a 
majority of the votes cast thereon is a 
measure of the intelligence in the elec- 
torate on that proposition. This is true, 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall 67 

the opportunity for participation was 
freely open to them. However, a de- 
cision rendered is still that of the ma- 
jority — an intelligent majority as against 
an intelligent minority, all not voting 
being carried as ciphers in this particular 
equation. 



whether few or many vote on the propo- 
sition, if the door of opportunity to vote 
on it is open to all the voters. So a 
small vote on a proposition compared 
to the vote for candidates voted for in 
the same election is not an argument 
against the policy of submitting propo- 
sitions to the electorate; and the de- 
cision of a proposition by a majority of 
the votes cast thereon is just and proper, 
even though a comparatively few of 
the voters choose to vote on the propo- 
sition. This may not be "majority rule," 
though not only a majority, but all the 
voters have the opportunity of express- 
ing their will on the proposition. 

Intelligent rule, or rule by intelligence, 
is preferable to majority rule, when the 
majority fail to exercise their privilege 
of voting on the proposition. 

Intelligence in government is prefer- 
able to mere numbers. The ancient 
theory was that intelligence in govern- 
ment was monopolized by the few in 
authority, and hence the masses were 
kept in subjection. We now know 
that intelligence in government is not 
monopolized by the few in authority; 
hence we have sought methods by which 
all the intelligence in a community may 
be brought to bear on the government 
of the community. The instruments for 
doing this are the Initiative and Refer- 
endum. These instruments give us gov- 
ernment by intelligence. The use of 
these instruments may not always give 
us "majority rule," but the ignorant ma- 
jority which fails to vote on propositions 
submitted to the vote of the entire 
electorate will not complain of decisions 
reached without their participation, when 



Our Two Leading Opponents 

Ex-President Taft and President 
Lowell, of Harvard 



When Mr. Taft's term as President of 
the United States expired, he accepted 
a Yale University professorship. In the 
preface of a recently published book en- 
titled "Popular Government, Its Essence, 
Its Permanence, and Its Perils," he says 
that being near the end of the school 
year, it was not practical to add his 
courses on constitutional law to the cur- 
riculum that year; but that it was sug- 
gested that he deliver a course of lec- 
tures on "some questions of modern gov- 
ernment." This he did, and these lec- 
tures together with an address before the 
American Bar Association, constitute the 
above-mentioned book. 

It is evident in the preface as well as 
in the book itself, that the chief object 
of the lectures, and of their publication 
in the book form, is to combat the rising 
tide of sentiment in favor of more di- 
rect participation by the voters in the 
processes of government, by means of 
the Direct Primary as a method of se- 
lecting candidates, the Recall as a method 
of controling public officers, and the Ini- 
tiative and Referendum as a means of 
final control of public affairs by the 
electorate. Besides these lectures and 
this book, Mr. Taft has delivered ad- 
dresses before many public bodies, and 
published articles in many widely dis- 
tributed publications, since he left the 
White House, and in few, if any, of these 
efforts has he failed to oppose the Ini- 



68 



Equity 



tiative and Referendum. So we may- 
consider ex-President Taft our most 
active as well as our most prominent 
opponent. 

With this introduction, let us consider 
the indicated portions of Mr. Taft's 
book. And the preface plainly shows 
that this book does not consist of lec- 
tures delivered off hand and then thrown 
together in the form of a book. The 
author's expression, "Since I have pre- 
pared this book for the press," proves 
that his expressions here published are 
deliberate. 

I. Errors of Professor Taft. 
On page 38 he says : 

^ "It is said that the representa- 
tive system is a failure because it 
gave rise to these evils." 

The advocates of the Initiative and 
Referendum movement have never said 
that the representative system is a fail- 
ure, but that it is imperfect; and that 
the Initiative, Referendum and Recall 
are means of perfecting the representa- 
tive system. On page 42 he expresses 
the same thought in the following 
words : 

"I now come to the consideration 
of the system which it is proposed 
to substitute for the representative 
system. The new system embraces 
three parts : the referendum, the 
initiative, and the recall." 

This is a grave error, as no one 
wishes to discard the representative sys- 
tem, nor substitute any other system for 
it. The representative system can 
scarcely be praised too highly. But 
those who consider themselves its spe- 
cial friends make a great mistake when 
they assert that the representative sys- 
tem as it has been used by the Anglo- 
Saxon peoples during the past several 
centuries cannot be improved. The sim- 
plest and most efficient instruments ever 
devised for its improvement are the 
Referendum, to correct misrepresenta- 
tion, the Initiative, to supply deficiencies 



in representation, and the Recall, to vote 
representatives out of office when they 
fail to represent. It is strange that Mr. 
Taft cannot see what is so plain and 
evident. He freely admits in his book 
that the movement to incorporate these 
things in our governmental machinery is 
growing rapidly. It is strange that he 
cannot see why. 

The Referendum Not "Compulsory/* 

On page 49 he says : 

"This new theory, however, is that 
we are to have a compulsory refer- 
endum, that the legislature shall be 
compelled to refer all laws of im- 
portance to the people, and that this 
referendum may be effected, with- 
out the intervention of the legisla- 
ture at all, but through another 
instrumentality which I have men- 
tioned, to wit, the initiative." 

There are two inexcusable errors in 
this single sentence. In the popular Ref- 
erendum, the legislature does not do the 
referring. If Mr. Taft had read a single 
one of the I. and R. constitutional 
amendments that have been adopted by 
more than a dozen states, he would have 
seen this plainly. And, in this country, 
no one favors the compulsory Referen- 
dum. The laws passed by our legisla- 
tures are far too numerous for any one 
to seriously think of applying the com- 
pulsory Referendum to them. The op- 
tional Referendum is the only kind that 
is advocated in this country. Mr. Taft, 
in his preface, refers to President Lo- 
well's book, to be mentioned later in this 
article. If he will turn to page 164 of 
Mr. Lowell's book he will see the com- 
pulsory and optional forms of the Ref- 
erendum clearly explained. 

Prevents Undermining of Character. 

On page 51 he says: 

"Representative government is 
said to be a failure because the peo- 
ple are not capable of selecting 
proper representatives." 

We do not say that representative 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall 



69 



government is a failure; and we do not 
say that the people are not capable of 
selecting proper representatives. What 
we say is that the system of leaving pub- 
lic affairs entirely in the hands of elected 
representatives, without limit to their 
authority, and without the possibility of 
control of either the representatives or 
their acts by the electorate, is unwise. 
Such circumstances frequently expose 
normally honest men to undue and un- 
fair temptations. Shrewd and powerful 
politicians and agents of corporations 
are able to add threats to temptations, 
and thus undermine character that would 
withstand any ordinary strain. An 
elected representative is still human, with 
the customary frailties of average hu- 
manity. He would have to be super- 
human to stand firm under the pressure 
that some legislators have been sub- 
jected to. These influences have their 
source in what is known as the "invisible 
government." That it is powerful, its 
victims can testify. But when there is a 
simple remedy that will protect both our 
representatives and the public interests 
from the domination of this invisible 
government, should we not adopt and ap- 
ply the remedy? This simple remedy is 
the Referendum. It limits the authority 
of representatives over public affairs. It 
gives the electorate the possibility of 
final control over their own business. 
With this instrument within the reach of 
the voters, the invisible government van- 
ishes and is no more; and our repre- 
sentatives are no longer tempted and 
badgered. For, even if they should do 
the worst that the "interests" might wish, 
they could not "deliver the goods," for 
the voters would have the option of the 
final decision. Representative govern- 
ment was satisfactory until it came un- 
der the domination of the "invisible gov- 
ernment." An instrumentality that will 
banish the "invisible government" will 
restore representative government to its 
former place in the confidence of the 
people. 



On page 54 Professor Taft says : 

"Could any system be devised bet- 
ter adapted to the exaltation of 
cranks and the wearying of the elec- 
torate of their political duties than 
the giving of power to 5 per cent, or 
even 8 per cent, of the voters to 
submit all the fads and nostrums 
that their active but impractical 
minds can devise to be voted on in 
frequent elections?" 

Again we refer Mr. Taft to the I. and 
R. constitutional amendments in more 
than a dozen states to show him that 
these instruments as here used do not 
and cannot produce "frequent elections." 
And we again refer him to Mr. Lowell's 
book, page 202, where that eminently 
conservative author says that in the use 
of these instruments the Swiss have 
shown themselves to be "an eminently 
conservative people." 

Mr. Lowell further says : 

"The most notable fact about 
Swiss experience with the initiative 
is the small amount of legislation it 
has produced. Even the attempts 
to use it have not been very fre- 
quent. The total output of federal 
legislation from that source in a 
score of years has been two meas- 
ures, or one in ten years. In the 
cantons the result has been smaller 
still. In the eighteen, or in some 
cases, twenty, years covered by the 
tables only -fifteen measures have 
been enacted in this way by all the 
eighteen cantons that possess the 
procedure, or an average of less 
than one measure per canton in 
twenty years, while in Bern, the 
most prolific of them all, the aver- 
age is only one measure in five 
years." 

Figures can be shown that we, in this 
country, also, do not use these instru- 
ments to place on the ballot "all the fads 
and nostrums" that "cranks can devise." 
It is not so easy to fool even 5 per cent, 
of the electorate in the glare of public 
discussion. 

As to the local use of these instru- 
mentalities in the United States, the 
writer is now making an investigation 
concerning the use of the Initiative, Ref- 



70 

erendum and Recall in the commission- 
governed cities, which as a rule have the 
Initiative, Referendum and Recall in 
their charters. These results show that 
these instrumentalities have not been 
abused. In fact, the reports show a re- 
markable degree of restraint on the 
part of the voters in those municipalities. 
For example, of 135 cities thus far heard 
from which have the Initiative, Referen- 
dum and Recall, only 52 have ever used 
any of these instrumentalities. Mr. Taft's 
statements and arguments are based en- 
tirely on theory and not on facts. He 
ignores the results in the states and 
cities which have the Initiative, Referen- 
dum and Recall in their constitutions and 
charters. 



Not "Hasty" in Action. 

In several places Mr. Taft falls into 
one of his old errors. On page 62 he 
says "temporary, popular passion." On 
page 81 he speaks of the Recall as "a 
part of what has not infrequently been 
called the 'hair trigger' form of govern- 
ment, by which, immediately upon the 
presentation of an issue, it shall be 
passed upon by the electorate." On page 
85, "must follow the course of popular 
passion and momentary expression of the 
people without deliberation and without 
opportunity for full information." 

The idea that the Initiative and Ref- 
erendum are "hasty" in their action, that 
they result in government by the "sud- 
den gust of popular passion and whim," 
and that it is "hair trigger government," 
was strongly presented in an address de- 
livered by Senator Henry Cabot Lodge, 
of Massachusetts, before the Historical 
Society of Raleigh, N. C, November 28, 
1911 ; and a number of prominent public 
men, Mr. Taft among the number, were 
thus led into this error. 

A complete answer to this error is 
given in Senate Document No. 651, 62d 
Congress, 2d session, which will be sent 
free upon application to this office. In 
brief, all of the constitutional amend- 



Equity 

ments providing for the Initiative and 
Referendum thus far adopted (in more 
than a dozen states), the Referendum 
must be invoked within 90 days after 
the adjournment of a legislature, and 
the referred measure is not voted on un- 
til the next state election, which is usu- 
ally in the November of the following 
year! Thus there is more deliberation 
involved than in any other of our proc- 
esses. The Initiative, in its nature, can- 
not be hasty. It takes a long time for 
even experts to frame a proposed law. 
And after it is framed to the satisfaction 
of its sponsors (usually involving much 
consultation with one another and with 
experts, drawing, redrawing, etc.), it has 
to be circulated for the required num- 
ber of signers, and all this must be com- 
pleted and submitted to the secretary of 
state four months before the election. 
No "sudden gust" nor "hasty passion" 
about this tedious and thoughtful process. 



Educational Value of the Initiative 
and Referendum. 

In several places Mr. Taft uses the 
expression "necessarily uninformed elec- 
torate." In most states having the Ini- 
tiative and Referendum, an official 
pamphlet is required to be mailed to 
every voter by the secretary of state, 
this pamphlet containing the full text of 
the measures submitted and the form in 
which they will appear on the ballot, and 
usually, arguments for and against each 
measure. Thus the electorate becomes 
informed — and this has proven to be the 
most efficient school of practical states- 
manship ever devised. Witness the tes- 
timony of Senator Chamberlain, of Ore- 
gon, on another page of this issue of 
Equity. 

Also Mr. Taft makes a number of ref- 
erences to the fact that the votes on 
measures are fewer than for candidates 
in the same election, and hence he calls 
it "government by a minority." This 
subject will be taken up in connection 
with Mr. Lowell and his book. 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall 



7\ 



II. Mr. Lowell and His Book. 
One of the chief reasons that 



the 



voters of the historic state of Massachu- 
setts have not yet had an opportunity to 
decide for themselves whether or not 
they shall have the Initiative and Refer- 
endum is that annually the President of 
Harvard takes up his green bag and 
goes over to the golden dome on Beacon 
Hill and so impresses the committee on 
constitutional amendments that they re- 
fuse to allow the voters to express them- 
selves on that question. He did that 
again this year, as we will presently see. 
He has also recently published a book. 

The writer of these lines purchased 
this book (the price is high for its size 
and value — $2.25) and struggled through 
its rather dreary pages. The title of the 
book is "Public Opinion and Popular 
Government." The subject is important, 
and it would be interesting but for the 
"what's-the-use" spirit in which it was 
written. The reader is led to wonder if 
the author thinks that anything in human 
history was ever really worth while. 
Does he consider the Christian religion a 
failure because sin is still in the world — 
after a trial of Christianity for nearly 
twenty centuries? Does he consider all 
our penal statutes in vain because there 
is still robbery and murder? Because an 
improvement in civilization or in govern- 
ment does not do all that its most enthu- 
siastic supporters wished or expected it 
to do, shall we blind ourselves to the good 
that it really does do, and throw it away ? 

Such a policy would have kept us in 
savagery. If the psychology of the 
writer of this book had been general and 
prevailed, there would never have been 
any revolutionary war in this country ; 
and the negroes would still be in slavery. 
However, there is one subject in which 
he does show some interest, and that is 
the importance of the employment of ex- 
perts in governmental departments — a 
thing now generally recognized, and its 
practise is rapidly on the increase. 



Lowell's Note of Pessimism. 
It is difficult to choose a striking sam- 
ple of the author's indifferent attitude, 
as it is diffused so generally and so uni- 
formly throughout his book. Perhaps 
the following, from page 100, may serve 
as a fair sample: 

"The result has been a series of 
experiments, each hailed as a new 
declaration of popular independence, 
and each in a measure disappointing. 
Some of them, like the Australian 
ballot, are excellent so far as they 
go, but have not succeeded in break- 
ing down seriously the power of the 
party machines ;" etc. 

If the author will inspect the history 
of a powerful party machine in Oregon 
a few years before the introduction of 
the Initiative and Referendum there in 
1902, and a few years after, he will learn 
that these two instruments did destroy 
one of the most powerful party ma- 
chines, and that it remains destroyed. 
He will find, among other things, that a 
Democratic governor was elected in that 
Republican state; and that the same 
Democrat was sent to represent the state 
in the United States Senate, while the 
state remained Republican. And this is 
only one example of the injury and de- 
struction that has been wrought on polit- 
ical machines by the Initiative and Ref- 
erendum.* 



*Beginning for convenience with 1876, Ore- 
gon has always gone Republican for president 
except in 1892, when it went fusion; and in 
1912, Wilson carried the state, but by only a 
plurality vote, as the combined vote of Taft 
and Roosevelt was very much greater than 
Wilson's vote. So, for president, Oregon has 
always been quite consistently Republican. As 
to Congressmen, Oregon has rarely if ever 
(the statistics are not now readily at hand) 
sent a Democrat to ihe House of Representa- 
tives in Washington. All the three congress- 
men from Oregon now are Republicans, in 
spite of the split in the Republican party in 
1912. The present legislature is strongly Re- 
publican, as were past legislatures. The state 
Senate now is: Republicans 28, Democrats 2; 
House, Republicans 48, Democrats 5, Rep. 
Prog. 6. Dem. Prog. 1. These figures show 
that, politically, Oregon is a Republican state 
by a very large majority. But in J 902 the 
Initiative and Referendum were put into the 
constitution, and the political sentiment of the 
state remained Republican, but the machine 
began to break. A Democratic governor was 



72 



Equity 



A Close Vote Sliakes His Faith. 



On pages 185 to 187 he gives the small 
percentage of the vote cast on certain 
measures in Switzerland, and instances 
of decisions being determined by a very 
small majority — a very close vote; and 
on page 187 he says : "Such instances 
do not condemn the institution, but they 
shake our faith in a popular vote as an 
infallible index of public opinion." As 
I read this I could not help making a 
marginal note as follows: What does 
the author think of the many instances 
in which laws have been made in legis- 
lative bodies by a very small vote, or by 
a very small majority — a very close 
vote? Do these things "shake his faith" 
in the legislative system of making laws? 

And now, after more than a decade of 
experience with the Initiative and Refer- 
endum in many parts of this country, the 
author says of that system on page 174 : 
"As yet it is too early to predict what 
the ultimate effect of the institution will 
be. A generation must pass before that 
can be determined." What shall we say 
of such a student of recent history and 
of such an interpreter of recent his- 
tory ? Suppose such an attitude had been 
taken regarding this Republic in 1790 or 
1800? Would not such an attitude have 
been fatal, even after our historic strug- 
gle and our early years of construction? 
What would have been thought of Mr. 
Lowell in Massachusetts any time from 
1775 to 1800? An answer to this ques- 
tion will throw some light on what we 
should think of him now. 



elected in 1902, perhaps for the first time in 
the state's history. And at present the gov- 
ernor, adjutant-general and commissioner of 
insurance are Democrats, while the secretary 
of state, state treasurer, superintendent of 
public instruction and attorney-general are Re- 
publicans. By a peculiar method, the state 
has for some years really chosen United States 
senators by popular vote; and strangely, for 
several years, Oregon has had one Democrat 
in the United States Senate, and now two. 
The Republican United States senators were 
the chief managers of the powerful political 
machine in the palmy days. The I. and R. 
broke the machine at this particular point 
and in the governor's office. The old corrupt 
bosses have been retired in disgrace long »go. 



But let us turn our attention to Mr. 
Lowell's latest exploit — his (voluntary) 
appearance before the committee on con- 
stitutional amendments in the state capi- 
tol at Boston, March 9, 1914. 

The Power to Start Something. 

The Boston Morning Herald for 
March 10th states that Mr. Lowell 

"Showed that 25,000 people, if that 
be the number chosen, could force 
an issue over which the whole state 
would have to fight. It might be a 
religious, or a class or a racial issue 
that ought to lie dormant, but with 
the Initiative it could be invoked." 

Does not Mr. Lowell or any other citi- 
zen of Massachusetts know that one man 
in either house of the Massachusetts leg- 
islature can propose any measure at any 
time during the sitting of the legisla- 
ture ? This could have been done by any 
one man in the legislature at any time 
since Massachusetts has been a state, and 
the Massachusetts legislature convenes 
every year. However, one man could 
not "force an issue" all over the state, 
but a majority of 40 men in the Senate 
and of 240 men in the House could do 
so; and is not that much more likely 
than that 25,000 voters should do so? 
Concerning a religious question or any 
other question "which should lie dor- 
mant," there is no more danger of such 
a question being initiated by 25,000 voters 
in Massachusetts than by a majority of 
the legislature in Massachusetts. In no 
state, nor in any city, which has the Ini- 
tiative and Referendum, has any attempt 
at any such thing been made, and it is 
much more likely that such attempt shall 
be made by the legislature of a state or 
legislative body of any city, than that it 
shall be made by popular Initiative by the 
large number of voters required to ini- 
tiate. 

Further, Mr. Lowell is reported in the 
same paper to have said that "the scheme 
is not working well where now on trial." 
This is absolutely incorrect. Let Mr. 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall 



73 



Lowell, or any other man, go into any 
state which now has the Initiative and 
Referendum and propose their repeal, 
and see what will happen. He will find 
a few "sore heads" among professional 
politicians and agents of corporations 
and other large interests who would be 
very glad to see the rights and privi- 
leges of the people curtailed; but let 
him get an expression from the people 
themselves, and he will learn that the 



above-quoted statement cannot be sub- 
stantiated^ 

The Truth About Oregon. 
Further, he says : 

"Oregon voted on 30 questions 
last year, of which her people nec- 
essarily knew little. They did not, 
with any unanimity, participate in 
the decisions." 

Let us see. Here are the questions 
with the vote on each : 



OREGON — Election of November 5, 1912 



Constitutional Amendments: 

Extending the right of suffrage to women 

Creating the office of Lieutenant-Governor 

Providing for a uniform rule of taxation, etc 

For the purpose of permitting taxes to be levied upon different 
classes of property at different rates, etc 

To repeal all of Section la of Article IX except that part prohibit- 
ing poll and head taxes in Oregon, and to add a provision pro- 
hibiting the declaration of an emergency in any act passed by the 
Legislature regulating taxation and exemptions 

To require for the adoption of any proposed constitutional amend- 
ment a majority vote of all the electors voting at such election, 
instead of a majority of those voting on the amendment only. . . 

Making stockholders in banking corporations liable to pay for the 
benefit of depositors an amount equal to the par value of the 
stock held by any stockholder in addition to having originally 
paid the par value therefor 

To require a majority vote of all e'ectors voting at any election to 
adopt constitutional amendment and pass initiative measures. . . 

Prohibiting the State from increasing its indebtedness for road 
building in excess of two per cent, of the taxable property of the 
State. 

Prohibiting counties from voting any indebtedness for roads, in ex- 
cess of two per cent, of assessed valuation of all property in the 
county 

Inserting a section providing for the taxation of incomes from 
whatever source or sources derived 

Empowering the court of any county to issue and sell bonds or 
other securities to build and maintain roads within the county 
when authorized by a majority of the voters of the county. . . 

Abolishing the State Senate, etc 

Providing for specific graduated taxes, in addition to other taxes, 
upon all franchises and rights-of-way, lands and other natural 
resources in excess of $10,000 under one ownership and assessing 
water powers in the counties where situate: exempting from tax 
ation all personal property of every kind, and improvements on, 
in and under land, except a county may enact a county law to 
tax the same 



03 


o 


61,265 
50,562 
51,852 


57,104 
61,644 
56,671 


52,045 


54,483 


63,881 


47,150 


32,934 


70,325 


82,981 


21,738 


35,721 


68,861 


59,452 


43,447 


57,258 


43,858 


52,702 


52,948 


38,568 
31,020 


63,481 
71,183 


31,534 


82,015 



. 60 

■c > 

o g 

"So* 
«3 




4,161 


' 11 ',082 
4,819 




2,438 


16,731 






37,391 


61,243 






33,140 


16,005 




13,400 






246 




24,913 

49,16 




50,418 



tOn the day that the proof of this article 
was received from the printer, a prominent 
citizen of Oregon happened to call at the 
office of Equity. As a test, he was asked 
what would happen if any one should go to 
Oregon and try to destroy the I. and R. He 
looked surprised and his eyes flashed when 
he said: "It would be a dangerous procedure. 
The people of Oregon would fight for the 
Initiative and Referendum like they would 
fight for bread. They would as soon think of 
giving up their state charter as to seriously 
think of giving up the Initiative and Refer- 
endum. They consider themselves now a free 



feople; which they would not be without the 
nitiative and Referendum." This gentleman 
has always been a Republican, and at times 
in the past he has been suspected of machine 
sympathies; but in 1912 he joined the Roose- 
velt revolt, and now he says that if the 
Progressive party does not become a perma- 
nency he will become a Democrat. Some years 
ago he was a Republican member of the state 
Senate, and he has even been mentioned for 
the United States Senate, He says that the 
I. and R. completely routed the railroad lobby 
from the State House, and thereby removed a 
long-standing source of corruption. 



74 



Equity 



OREGON — Election of November 5, 1912 



Statutes: 

Bill for an Act to create out of the eastern part of Clackamas 

County, a new county to be called Cascade county 

Bill for an Act creating a single Board of Regents for the Univer- 
sity of Oregon and the State Agricultural College, etc 

Bill for an Act authorizing any county in this State to issue bonds 

for the construction of permanent roads 

Bill for an Act to create a State Highway Department, and fixing 

salarie s 

Bill to put law into effect December 1, 1912, instead of January 1, 

1915, creating State Printing Board 

Bill for an Act creating the office of Hotel Inspector 

Bill for an Act making eight hours a day's labor in all cases where 

labor for the State, county, school district, municipality or 

other subdivisions of the State are interested, and that no liens 

or claims shall be filed against the building or other structure . . . 

Bill for an Act to protect purchasers of stocks and bonds (" blue 

sky " law) 

Bill for an Act prohibiting the employment of convicts of the State 
Penitentiary by any private person, firm or corporation and 
authorizing their use on public highways and State institutions 
on the request of the County Court or Superintendent of the 

State institution desiring to employ them 

Bill for an Act prohibiting the employment of County, City or 
Town convicts by any private firm, person or corporation and 

providing for their employment on public highways, etc | 

Bill for an Act creating a State Road Board authorizing expendi- 
ture not to exceed $1,000,000 per year 

Bill for an Act authorizing the respective counties of the State of 
Oregon to issue 20-year bonds for building roads within the 

county 

Bill for an Act providing for the consolidation of contiguous incor- 
porated cities and towns, legalizing consolidations heretofore 
attempted and providing a method for the creation and organiza- 
tion of new counties 

Bill for an Act to exempt from taxation all household furniture, 
domestic fixtures, household goods and effects actually in use in 
homes and dwellings, and all wearing apparel, watches, jewelry, 

and similar personal effects actually in use 

Bill for an Act to exempt from taxation all debts of every land 
whether on contract, note, mortgage, bond or otherwise, either 
within or without this State; public stocks and securities, bonds, 
warrants and moneys due from this State, or any oounty or other 
municipal subdivision; stocks and shares in incorporated or un- 
incorporated companies, except bank stocks, shares and banking 

capital 

Bill for an Act revising the inheritance tax laws 

Bill for an Act fixing the percentage that freight rates on less than 
carload lots shall bear to car loads and to establish minimum 

weights and maximum freights 

Bill for an Act to abolish Capital Punishment 

Bill for an Act prohibiting boycotting or picketing any industry . . . 

Bill for an Act prohibiting the use of the public streets, parks and 

public grounds, in any city or town of a population of 5,000 or 

over, for holding meetings for pub'ic discussion or speech-making 

purposes without a written permit from the mayor thereof 

Bill for an Act to assess and collect all taxes levied within Clackamas 
County from the land values, water powers, natural growths, 
deposits and other natural resources and public service corpora- 
tion franchises and rights of way, exempting all other classes or 
property, including lands used for municipal, educational, literary, 
scientific, religious or charitable purposes, now exempt. (Voted 

on only in Clackamas County) 

Bill for a local Act for Coos County to exempt from all taxes levied 
within said county all personal property of every kind and all 
improvements on, in and under land in said county, and all occu- 
pations, businesses, trades and professions, except the liquor 
business, such occupations, etc., subject to regulation and may 
be charged sufficient to pay for issuing licenses therefor. (Voted 

on only in Coos County) 

Bill for an Act prohibiting the building of a court house in Harney 

County before the year 1916. (Voted on only in Harney County). 

Bill for an Act to establish " Taxpayers' National Bank of Jackson 

County, Oregon." (Voted on only in Jackson County) 



26,463 
48,701 
49,699 

23,872 

34,793 
16,910 

64,508 
48,765 



73,800 

71,367 
30,897 

43,811 
40,199 
60,357 



42,491 
38,609 



58,306 
41,951 
49,826 



48,987 



1,827 



1,113 

778 
1,975 



71,239 
57,279 
56,713 

83,846 

69,542 
91,995 

48,078 
57,293 



37,492 



.nx 

So 



16,430 



36,308 



37,731 j 33,636 
75,590 



60,210 



56,992 ! . 



o « 



44,776 
8,578 
7,014 

59,974 

34,749 

75,085 



8,528 



44,693 
16,599 

16,793 



51,826 



66,540 
63,839 



45,534 
64,578 
60,560 



62,532 



3,787 



1,909 

391 

2,379 



8,531 



12,772 



387 



24,094 
25,230 



22,627 
10,734 



13,545 

1,960 

796 
404 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall 



75 



OREGON— Election of November 5, 1912 



Statutes — Continued : 

Bill for an Act reducing the number of the Commissioners of the 
Port of Portland from 7 to 3. (Voted on only in Portland) 

Bill for a local Act for Multnomah County exempting from taxation 
all persona! property of every kind and all improvements in, on 
and under land in said county, and all occupations, businesses, 
trades and professions, except the liquor business, such occupa- 
tions, etc., subject to regulation and may be charged sufficient 
to pay for issuing licenses therefore. (Voted on only in Mult- 
nomah County) 

Bill for an Act abolishing the county high school of Wallowa County 
located at Enterprise in said County. (Voted on only in Wallowa 
County) 

Act vesting the Railroad Commission with power and jurisdiction 
to supervise and regulate every public service corporation and 
utility in the State of Oregon 

Act appropriating sums to the University of Oregon 

Act appropriating a further sum to the University 





o 


"u'> 
o o 

i2 ft 
% ft 


13,931 


18,668 




11,146 


23,901 




1,031 


655 


376 


65,985 
29,437 
27,310 


40,956 
78,985 
79,376 


25,029 
1 



Stf 



4,737 



12,755 



49,548 
52,066 



Do not these figures show information, 
interest and discrimination? These fig- 
ures are official, and they successfully 
controvert the distinguished gentleman's 
statement. X 

Elimination of the Ignorant Vote. 
True, the vote on these questions is 
not as high as that for candidates in the 
same election. It never is, because some 
voters feel a personal interest in candi- 
dates who do not feel an intellectual in- 
terest in measures submitted. That has 
always been true when constitutions or 
constitutional amendments have been 
submitted to popular vote in the various 
states. This is a well-recognized fact, 
with a well-known cause, and it is not 
an argument against the submission of 
measures to the electorate. In Oregon, 
the usual vote on measures is about 75% 
of the vote for candidates. On some 
measures, as those concerning the suf- 
frage, and the control of the liquor traf- 
fic, it has gone as high as 90% or higher ; 
and on some measures it has fallen con- 
siderably below 75% ; but the usual aver- 
age in Oregon and in perhaps most other 
states is about 75%. 



$The highest vote for candidates in 1912 
was 137,040. But that was unusually large on 
account of the bitter contention between the 
Taft and Roosevelt Republicans. The total 
vote for governor in 1910 was 117.690. 



Now let us devote a little space to this 
subject, which is mentioned a number of 
times by both Mr. Taft and Mr. Lowell 
and other opponents, as an objection to 
the Initiative and Referendum. A high 
ideal concerning the ballot is that it 
should be used only by the fit. Certainly 
this use of the ballot would result in 
good government. But the political exi- 
gencies are such that it is difficult to 
reach this ideal in practical politics. If 
we could limit the use of the ballot to 
the intelligent and interested voters, the 
ideal would be attained. The Initiative 
and Referendum does this very thing. 
The ignorant and disinterested voters 
disfranchise themselves by failing to vote 
on measures submitted, leaving the 
decision to the intelligent and the inter- 
ested voters. This is ideal, and the proc- 
ess is ideal, for the ignorant and indiffer- 
ent voters automatically disfranchise 
themselves, peacefully, while if extra- 
neous efforts were made to do this there 
would be all sorts of trouble— it could 
not be done. The usual average of 25% 
ignorant and indifferent voters are me- 
chanically discarded, and we get deci- 
sions based on interest and intelligence. 
This is one of the many beauties of the 
operation of the Initiative and Refer- 
endum. 



76 



Equity 



Government By Intelligence. 

However, the vote is sometimes less, 
occasionally much less, than 75% ; but 
the principle is the same. Let us take 
the most extreme case that we ever 
heard of. We have been told that in a 
certain election in a certain precinct in 
"Buck-town," a section of Cincinnati, 
there were 384 votes cast for Mr. Taft 
and i vote cast on a constitutional 
amendment that was submitted in that 
election. If that is true, that one vote 
represented the intelligence of that pre- 
cinct on that constitutional amendment; 
and we want a government of intelli- 
gence rather than of numbers. It is a 
blessing that we have a system by which 
intelligence can register itself, and igno- 
rance can disfranchise itself. The door 
of opportunity should be open to the in- 
telligence of the electorate. Mr. Taft, 
on pages 54 and 55 of his book, says : 

"They invented this Initiative in 
Switzerland, and when a considerable 
percentage of voters refused^ to vote 
on the issues presented, they imposed 
a fine for failure to vote, with the 
result that the voters, to avoid the 
fine, cast their ballots, but they were 
blank." 

It is a fortunate thing that those who 
have not sense enough to vote intelli- 
gently on a proposition presented, have 
sense enough to vote a blank ballot, for, 
under these conditions, that is the very 
best thing they can do, for then they 
leave the decision to the intelligent 
voters. 

The above article in typewritten form 
was submitted to ex-President Taft, with 
the following letter : 

Philadelphia, March 28, 1914. 
Prof. Wm. H. Taft, New Haven, Conn. : 
Dear Sir: — / am inclosing herein a 
duplicate of an article which I have just 
prepared for April "Equity," which will go 
to press in several days. If you should 
wish to send a rejoinder to appear with 
this article, kindly send at earliest con- 
venience. If you are unable to prepare 



it on the day of receipt of this communi- 
cation, and if you should wish me to 
hold the matter up for a few days in 
order that you may have time to prepare 
and send the rejoinder, kindly let me 
know at once; and I will be. pleased to 
hold the matter up for you as long as 
possible. Very sincerely yours, 

C. F. Taylor. 

No reply, not even an acknowledg- 
ment, has been received from Mr. Taft. 

A duplicate of the article, and the 
same letter, were sent at the same time 
to President Lowell. His reply follows : 

HARVARD UNIVERSITY. 

President's Office. 
Cambridge, March 30, 1914. 

My Dear Sir : — I am much obliged to 
you for sending me your paper for 
Equity, criticising the views of Mr. 
Taft and myself. I have little to com- 
ment upon it, except that the newspaper 
reports, which you quote, of my recent 
remarks before the Legislature of 
Massachusetts, are, in some of the 
points, inaccurate, as newspaper reports 
are apt to be. I do not think that I said, 
"The scheme is not working well where 
now on trial," but rather, "It is not 
working wholly well where now on 
trial."' Also, I did not say that "Oregon 
voted on over thirty questions last year, 
of which her people necessarily knew 
little," but, "of some of which her people 
necessarily knew little." 

In general, what strikes me about your 
comments, so far as I am concerned, is 
their personal nature. I have always 
tried not to bring into controversial 
writings the personal qualities of advo- 
cates of opposing dogmas, because I do 
not think it right to argue a question by 
seeking to raise a personal prejudice 
against one's opponent. Surely, the ques- 
tion is the truth or falsity of the ideas 
which form the subject of the contro- 
versy, and nothing else. 

I am glad of your notice in Equity, 
for if my book contains any grain of 
truth, your readers may be induced to 
look at it, and see that grain. 
Very truly yours, 

A. Lawrence Lowell. 

Charles Fremont Taylor, Esq., 
1520 Chestnut Street, 

Philadelphia, Pa. 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall 



77 



The reader will see from Mr. Lowell's 
own words, that the newspaper reporters 
erred very little in their reports of his 
remarks before the committee. 

I have read the second paragraph of 
his letter over several times, and then 
read again and again the portion of the 
above article referring to Mr. Lowell, 
and I cannot bring myself to change a 
single word. Is not the spirit in which 
a book was written, as shown from be- 
ginning to end, a legitimate subject for 
comment and criticism? How often do 
we see books and authors criticised for 
their undue optimism? Is not undue 
pessimism as proper a subject for criti- 
cism? And when Mr. Lowell, in addi- 
tion to being an author of books on vital 
public questions, becomes a "self-ap- 
pointed" advisor of an important legis- 
lative committee year after year, is not 
his psychological attitude toward the ques- 
tion in hand and similar important public 
questions, a proper subject for observa- 
tion and comment? I think so. But I am 
not so dogmatic as to say that others 
shall think so. I merely take this stand 
for myself, and if any criticism comes 
from so doing, I will have to take it. 

In this connection, however, I em- 
phatically disclaim any intention of 
"personal" criticism. While I do not en- 
joy a personal acquaintance with Presi- 
dent Lowell, I imagine that his personal- 
ity must be of a very high type, or he 
could not have attained, nor could he 
maintain, his position as head of Har- 
vard University. But that should not 
protect him, nor should he wish it to 
protect him, from reasonable comment 
upon the spirit in which he writes upon 
public questions, and upon his psycho- 
logical attitude toward pending public 
issues. 

Educators and students in colleges and 
high schools all over this great country are 
taking a constantly deeper and more active 
interest in Vie processes of self-government. 
The above article, concerning the great uni- 
versities of Yale and Harvard, will attract 
their serious attention. 



Oregon Senator on Oregon. 

It is quite common for opponents of 
the Initiative and Referendum movement 
to refer to the experience of Oregon as 
a sort of "horrible example" of the ex- 
cessive use of the Initiative and Refer- 
endum. In varying degrees of scorn, 
these critics point to the Oregon ballot, 
which carried along with the list of elec- 
tive officials thirty-two legislative acts 
or proposals at one election on which the 
voters of the state were expected to 
express their final verdict. 

Having this in mind when recently 
the writer met Senator Chamberlain, of 
Oregon, in Washington, the question was 
put to him frankly as to how he and 
the people of Oregon now look at the 
matter. And this is what the senator 
from Oregon had to say : 

"In the first place, even the presenta- 
tion of that large ballot, which has 
caused the unfavorable comment to 
which you refer, came along with the 
flood of ideas naturally connected with 
the transition from the old to the new 
system. This meant a tremendous 
amount of study on the part of the peo- 
ple about public needs and public reme- 
dies. If you could have seen, as I did, 
during that campaign, thousands of peo- 
ple spending their evenings and spare 
time in study groups, with the list of 
propositions before them, reading the 
pamphlet explaining each proposition 
and formulating their opinions on the 
questions submitted, you would never 
have doubted the tremendous educational 
value of that Referendum campaign to 
the electorate of Oregon. 

"From that point of view alone it was 
worth all the cost. But any one who 
imagines that the adoption of the Initi- 
ative and Referendum is going to mean 
the continuous and extensive use of that 
process upon a large and increasing 
number of public questions each year is 
entirely mistaken. We in Oregon know 
that the number of questions submitted 
at that election was due to the fact that 



78 Equity 

the legislature had failed to respond to 
the progressive demands of the people. 
We know that a majority of the legis- 
lature was still in the hands of the cor- 
porate and predatory interests. 

"We know that this is only a tem- 
porary condition, and that in a few 
years at the most it won't be necessary 
to use the Initiative and Referendum at 
all, or very seldom, in our state, for 
the legislature will have become re- 
sponsive to the needs of the people. The 
Initiative and Referendum are not in- 
tended for constant use nor for use 
at all so long as the law-making repre- 
sentatives do their duty. They simply 
stand in reserve as the weapons with 
which to express or enforce the reserved 
rights of the people. 

"But there are no regrets over the 
adoption or the use of these instruments 
in my state. See the great steps in 
progress they have given us, such as the 
direct primary, the corrupt practices acts, 
workers' compensation and many acts 
for the improvement and extension of 
the public service." 

And even though the use which Ore- 
gon has made seems to some to have 
been excessive, yet the referred meas- 
ures have been inconsequential as com- 
pared with the total number of bills, 
resolutions, etc., passed by the legis- 
lature; and the initiated measures have 
numbered only a small percentage of 
the total number of bills, resolutions, 
etc., introduced into the legislature for 
consideration. As these facts are 
squarely faced, it is evident that the use 
which Oregon has made of these instru- 
ments has not been excessive. 



U. S. Senators and the People 



The election of officers at definite times 
for definite terms of office, without any pos- 
sibility of control over the elected officers or 
their acts during their terms, is not self- 
government. This system has broken down 
time after time. A slight modification, con- 
sisting of machinery for the possibility of 
voting an officer out of office before the end 
of his term (the Recall), and of machinery 
for the possibility of direct control of public 
affairs by the voters (the Initiative and 
Referendum), improves and perfects the old 
system, and gives us real self-government. 



For the first time in the history of 
this country, the candidates for the 
United States Senate will be chosen by 
direct vote of the voters of their re- 
spective states. Hence the candidates 
for that office will have to appeal to 
the voters in this year's campaign. Can 
they reasonably ask an electorate to 
trust them whom they themselves can- 
not trust ? The voters of every state 
should say to these candidates: "If you 
will show your confidence in our ability 
to control our public affairs by means 
of the Initiative and Referendum, we 
will trust your integrity and ability in 
representing us in the United States 
Senate; but if you will not trust us 
with our own affairs, how can you ex- 
pect us to trust you to represent us?" 

To each of these candidates for re- 
election to the Senate, Equity is send- 
ing the following letter and list of 
questions : 

My Dear Sir : — Under the new U. S. 
constitutional amendment providing for 
popular election of United States senators, 
you and other senators whose terms are 
about to expire will this year for the first 
time look to the voters of your state for 
a continuance of your commission to repre- 
sent them in the national senate. In view 
of this fact, the people will be more than 
ever interested in, and certainly more than 
ever entitled to know your attitude on cur- 
rent public affairs. Undoubtedly your posi- 
tion on many public questions is already 
known to your people. 

But there is one question of extraordinary 
public interest now receiving earnest and 
thoughtful consideration throughout the 
country, which in many states has been the 
subject of constructive legislation. I refer 
to final control of public measures by the 
voters, at their option, by means of the 
Initiative and Referendum ; and to the 
control of public officers by the voters, at 
their option, by means of the Recall. 

As state measures, let us confine ourselves 
to the Initiative and Referendum. These 
instruments of final control of public af- 
fairs by the voters, at their option, exist 
in more than a dozen states, North, South, 
East and West. Not in one of these states 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall 



79 



has there been the slightest open attempt 
to destroy these instruments. They are 
non-partisan — they have supporters in all 
parties ; and no party has ever taken a 
position directly and publicly opposing 
them. 

This popular movement is constantly 
growing in force, and it will continue until 
these instruments of real self-government 
are placed in the constitution of every state 
and in the charter of every municipality. 
Public men are continually measured by 
their attitude upon this question ; and this 
measurement will become more and more 
insistent in the very near future. 

The people of your state are as compe- 
tent to use the instruments of real self- 
government as are the people of Oregon, 
Maine or Arkansas ; and they will insist 
upon having these instruments in their 
state constitution. Not that they will ex- 
pect to make frequent use of them (unless 
there should be occasion), but they will 
insist upon having these instruments as 
their primary right, even though occasion 
for using them shall seldom occur. 

Equity is a quarterly publication which 
I have issued for a number of years in the 
interest of the Initiative, Referendum, Re- 
call and allied improvements in govern- 
mental processes. I have sent you copies 
from time to time. Of course it reaches 
the students and workers in this great 
popular movement all over the country. In 
the next (April) issue, I expect to extend to 
every United States senator who presents 
himself to the voters of his state for re- 
election, the privilege of placing himself 
definitely on record on this most important 
issue now before the voters of this country. 
To make it easy for you to so place your- 
self on record, I inclose questions upon a 
separate sheet, which I ask you to kindly 
answer as specifically as you may desire, 
and return to us at your earliest conveni- 
ence to be in time for publication in April 
Equity. We do not wish to make any mis- 
take in stating the position of any public 
man on this question. We want authori- 
tative information, first hand, and that is 
why I am taking the liberty of writing you 
on this subject. 

Asking your pardon for this interruption 
in your busy life, and thanking you in ad- 
vance for prompt attention, and feeling cer- 
tain that you are willing to trust the 
voters of your state with their own public 
affairs and public officers, I remain, 
Very sincerely yours, 

C. F. Taylor. 
(Please answer each question by "Yes" or 
"No.") 
[This being a copy of the list which went 



to Senator Fletcher, of Florida, the figures 
given are suitable for that state. The 
figures for each state are varied according 
to size and population.] 

1. Referendum : Do you favor an amend- 

ment to the constitution of Florida, 
by which a reasonable number, say 
3,000, of the voters thereof may invoke 
a Referendum upon any measure passed 
by the legislature? 
Answer 

2. Initiative : Do you favor an amendment 

to the constitution of Florida, by 
which a reasonable number, say 5,000, 
of the voters thereof may initiate de- 
sired legislation neglected by the legis- 
lature, and submit such measures to 
the legislature or directly to the voters 
for enactment? 
Answer 

3. Recall : Do you favor an amendment to 

the constitution of Florida by which 
the voters may vote officers out of 
office as well as to vote them into 
office ? 
Answer 

4. Home Rule for Cities : Do you favor 

state legislation by which the cities, 
towns and counties of Florida may 
have the privilege of adopting the 
Initiative, Referendum and Recall for 
use in local government? 
Answer 

5. Amending the U. S. Constitution : Are 

you in favor of a so-called "gate-way" 
amendment to the United States con- 
stitution, making it less difficult to 
amend and bringing it closer to the 
people? (The January issue of Equity, 
sent to you in January, had two 
illuminating articles on this subject. 
See pages 17 and 18.) 

Answer 

Remarks : 

Signature 

The first reply we received was from 
Senator Brandegee, of Connecticut. His 
answers were as follows : 

1. "No." 

2. "No." 

3. "No." 

4. "If any municipality in Connecticut 

should ask for it, the legislature, 
I think, would grant it." 

5. "Do not know what it is. Am in 

favor of the present form of rep- 
resentative government, and op- 
posed to a pure democracy. Am 



80 Equity 

opposed to making it any easier which good measures of legislation can be held 

to amend the Federal ConstitU- " p for * couple of years by reference. This, 

„ however, is preferable to the old condition 

' and will ultimately, I think, regulate itself. 

Organized labor, grangers, and all 0ur short experience has also suggested the 

organizations and individuals in Con- necessit / of legislation to prevent the re-initia- 

. tion of a defeated measure until a decent 

necticut who believe that the people length of time should elapse to justify the 

should be trusted to control their Own presumption of a proper change of public 

affairs, please take notice. sentiment. 

. . As a corrective, the Initiative and Referen- 

Senator Bnstow, of Kansas, says : I dum possess grea t moral force. The fact 

am in favor of the movement." that the people have reserved the right to do 

We hope to give a number of other th f °7" le ^ islatin ^ if their serv /f ■ ** or 

. * . refuse to obey them, has a healthful influence 

replies in our next issue. upon the modern general assembly, and at the 

same time removes many of the temptations to 

which, heretofore, they have been subject. 

Just before going to press the follow- It does not pay to buy a legislature as the 

ing important letter was received from result wiU be a repudiation at the next election. 

Senator Thomas, of Colorado: of^the'palf ^ ^^ "*" theref ° re ^ * *** 

United States Senate. Thus far, in my judgment, the Initiative and 

April 4 1914 Referendum have justified the resort which has 

_ „ _ , „ „, , , „ M x „, ., been had to them. Very sincerely yours, 

C. F. Taylor, Esq.. 1520 Chestnut Street, Phila- ' _ * J ^ ^ 

, .. . . -o C. S. Thomas. 

aelphia, Fa. : 

My Dear Sir:— Your request of the 3d in- Safeguarding Petitions. 
stant reaches me at a most inopportune time 

.. ^ j- *. 1 t u -i .BY TUDSON KING. EXECUTIVE SECRETARY 

for a satisfactory reply, as I am busily engaged J u ' &AJS *- U± vc - ^w^a-'vk.i 

in the preparation for discussion of one phase OF THE NATIONAL POPULAR GOVERN- 

of the Panama Tolls question. MENT LEAGUE, WASHINGTON, D. C. 

Our state turned to the Initiative and Refer- tj„ ^ \g\2 ELEVEN STATES 

endum in 1910 as the sole alternative to fur- „. m.,—.*^- 1 j 1 • 

ther dependence upon the General Assembly Th6 N " mber have secUred working State- 

for needed reformatory legislation. We had of Petitions. WI de Initiative and Refer- 

elected two successive legislatures on pledges endum amendments — six 

of the most unequivocal character only to have d Q th(J Qthers limited or defect- 

them contemptuously disregarded in total by . „ m^n , j • 1 j- ^ 

that body. The people, recalling a similar ex- »VC From 1898 to and including the 

perience in Oregon, determined to make resort 1912 election there were voted Upon in 

to the same remedy, hence the Governor, being those states a total of 176 Initiative and 

in sympathy with them, convened the legisla- Referendum measures placed on the bal- 

ture in extraordinary session and public ex- . . . ,, 

pression compelled them to submit the desired lot by petition, as shown by the follow- 

constitutional amendment to the electorate at ing table : 

the general elections of that year. It was Number of measures voted 

adopted by a four-to-one vote in spite of a ^.^ ^ ^ ^ m^lertion^ ^ 

most determined campaign against it. Igog 5^ Dakota* . . . . 4 6 4 14 

Like all meritorious remedies it has some de- 1902 Oregon ... 2 11 15 27 31 86 

fects which experience will develop and time ?-9Q5 t s , eva dat 1 •• •• J 

.„ _,, ., , , . . .. .... 1906 Montana 5 5 

will cure. The method of circulating petitions 190 7 Oklahoma 1 7 4 12 

and securing names is susceptible of abuse, and 1908 Missouri 2 3 5 

the publication of initiative laws must be regu- 1908 Maine 3$ 1 5 

, x f . , ■ -1 • ^ !910 Arkansas / 

lated in some such wise as prevails in Oregon, 191Q Colorado 26 26 

where the state pamphlet containing proposed 1911 Arizona 9 9 

measures of initiation and reference will 19 H California 6 

reach all voters in time for their careful con- Total . . "2 11 21 45 96 176 

sideration. 

It is also true that all sorts of schemes can *None from 1898 to 1908. 

...,,,, , * . . , tHad referendum only. Amendments and 

be initiated, but the good sense of the people, ^ submitted by legislature not included. 

I think, can be relied upon to turn them down. | Number of measures voted on in election 

Another drawback lies in the facility with of 1911, 1. 






The Initiative, Referendum and Recall 81 

A very large propor- virtue of fraudulent signatures. Oregon 



Who Promoted tion of the petitions nec- 
the Petitions? essary to submit these 
176 questions were se- 
cured by established powerful organiza- 
tions such as State Granges, Farmers' 
Unions, State Federations of Labor, 
Chambers of Commerce, Business Men's 
Organizations, State Committees of Po- 
litical Party, Direct Primary Leagues, 
Direct Legislation Leagues, People's 
Power Leagues, Anti- Saloon Leagues, 
Suffrage Associations, Liquor Associa- 
tions, Educational Societies, Good Roads 
Organizations, etc. Some have been se- 
cured by committees of citizens formed 
especially for the purpose. 

A widespread personal investigation 
shows that nearly all of these organi- 
zations and promoters of petitions at- 
tempted to get the required number of 
signatures by volunteer effort alone; 
and that with the exception of a few 
unusual cases the effort failed and the 
petition had to be completed with the 
aid of solicitors who were employed and 
paid to give their zvhole time to the 
work. Experience proves that under the 
prevailing percentages both are re- 
quired. A comparatively small number 
of petitions have been secured entirely 
by hired solicitors. A large number of 
petitions have failed to secure the re- 
quired number of signatures. 

Of the thousands of 
Extent of For- men an( J women who 
gery and Fraud, from 1904 to 1912, paid 
and unpaid, helped to se- 
cure these 176 petitions, attempted fraud 
has developed only in connection with 
one Oregon petition in 1908, one in 
1910, and a few in Colorado in 1912. In 
each of these cases the managers of pe- 
titions were "jobbed" by dishonest 
solicitors, but the forged names were 
either discovered and thrown out before 
the petitions were filed, or else were dis- 
covered by the Secretary of State's office 
and thrown out. Not a single question 
has ever been placed on t\e ballot by 



has a specific law covering this kind of 
forgery and false swearing, and offend- 
ers have been sent to the penitentiary. 
It is up to other states to follow suit. 
Some have. 

In 1913 extended forgery was 
The Ohio discovered by the state officials 
Frauds. f Ohio in connection with the 
attempted referendum petitions, 
one against a tax law, another against a 
workingmen's compensation law. It is 
significant that the petitions were pro- 
moted by men who have always fought 
against the adoption of the Initiative 
and Referendum. The courts sustained 
the prompt and proper action of the 
state officials in throwing out the peti- 
tion. Several men should be in the 
penitentiary, but against the desire of 
friends of the Initiative and Refer- 
endum, the Ohio legislature of 1913 
failed to enact a law against and pre- 
scribe penalty for forgers and per- 
jurers to Initiative and Referendum 
petitions. [This has now been done. 
See under Ohio, in the Progress De- 
partment, in this issue. — Ed.] 

It is now demanded 
A Remedy Worse by some people in 
Than the Disease. Oregon, Colorado, 
Ohio and other states, 
that the legislatures enact laws absolutely 
prohibiting the hiring of solicitors in any 
case and making all petitions dependent 
upon volunteer effort alone. They are 
not, however, proposing to reduce the 
required number of signatures. The rea- 
sons urged for the proposed law are : 

First, to prevent the submission of 
too many measures. 

Second, to abolish fraud in securing 
petitions. 

As to the first, three elections in two 
states have developed a large number of 
questions because of legislative inaction. 
Thirty-seven other elections in these two 
and other states have had a small num- 
ber of questions submitted by petition 
(see table). As a matter of fact, it is 



82 



Equity 



not the masses of the people, but a few- 
men who want to do the thinking and 
deciding for the people, who seem so 
disturbed. It is not the number but the 
kind of questions proposed, and the way 
they are decided, that worries these few. 

As to the second, this proposition was 
fully discussed at the conference of 
the National Popular Government 
League, held at Washington, D. C, 
December 6, 1913, and the following 
resolution was unanimously adopted : 

"PAID SOLICITORS: — Experience 
has demonstrated that it is impracticable 
to secure sufficient Initiative, Refer- 
endum and Recall petitions under the 
prevailing percentages without the aid 
of paid solicitors even for measures 
which have subsequently been approved 
by enormous majorities. Citizens should 
be permitted to show their patriotism 
by contributing money as well as time. 
Therefore, zue unqualifiedly condemn the 
efforts now being made by the enemies 
of direct legislation to prevent adequate 
compensation being paid to honest solici- 
tors employed to secure signatures under 
responsible supervision. As a proper 
remedy for alleged abuses we heartily 
favor the inclusion in Corrupt Practices 
acts, of stringent provisions imposing 
heavy penalties for misrepresentation, 
intimidation, bribery, forgery or other 
vicious practices, in connection with the 
securing of petitions for the Initiative, 
the Referendum, or the Recall." 

Delegates from eleven state Direct 
Legislation Leagues were present, and 
a large number of those in attendance 
had had personal experience in secur- 
ing petitions in Initiative and Refer- 
endum states. The proposition to pro- 
hibit paying solicitors was rejected be- 
cause, as pointed out in the resolution, 
it is unsound in theory and would de- 
stroy the Initiative and Referendum in 
practice. 

It was not sentiment, 
Actual Cost of but personal knowledge 
Some Petitions. G f the hard facts of ex- 
perience which led the 



delegates to pass this resolution, and 
every one of them to declare that a pro- 
hibitory law would kill the Initiative and 
Referendum. The cost of securing a 
few typical petitions is given below. Re- 
member that the report covers cash paid 
to solicitors and does not, save in a few 
cases, include the total cash cost of the 
petition, to say nothing of the cash cost 
of the ensuing campaign. 

The cost of petitions on the liquor 
question, either wet or dry, is not a 
safe basis of comparison to be used as 
a standard for petitions on other public 
questions. 

In 1910 the Direct Pri- 
South Dakota, mary League initiated a 
direct primary law. Five 
per cent., 5,700 signatures, required. In 
addition to the volunteer work the cash 
cost to complete was $800. Adopted, 
election 1912. Vote, 51,154 yes, 28,892 
no; being 71% of total vote. Authority, 
Hon. R. O. Richards, Huron, S. D., 
President League. 

In 1906 the State Farmers' 
Oregon. Grange, well organized, initi- 
ated a law taxing telephone, 
telegraph, express and other companies. 
Eight per cent, 7,820 signatures, required. 
"After four months' work on it we had 
to go to Portland to finish the petition 
and it cost us about $600 for paid solic- 
itors," says B. G. Leedy, Corvalis, Ore., 
then State Master of the Grange. 
Adopted, election of 1906. Vote, 70,872 
yes, 6,360 no; being 80% of total vote. 
This is the law which was carried to the 
United States Supreme Court by the 
Morgan telephone interests and decided 
the question for the whole nation as to 
the "constitutionality" of the Initiative 
and Referendum. The case cost the 
Grange and organized labor many thou- 
sands of dollars. 

In 1910 the State Federation of Labor, 
after rejections by two legislatures, 
initiated an employers' liability law, 8%, 
8,000 signatures, required Much volun- 
teer work. Then paid solicitors. Cash 
cost to finish petition, $255.45. Cost of 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall 



83 



campaign, $1,414.88. Adopted 1910. 
Vote, 56,258 yes, 33,943 no; being 75% 
of total vote. Authority, Will Daly, 
State President. 

In 1912 the People's Power 
Montana. League of Montana circulated 
a joint petition for four laws, a 
Direct Primary Law, a Corrupt Practices 
Act, Direct Election of United States 
Senators, Presidential Primary. Eight 
per cent., 5,454 signatures, required. Last 
2,050 names had to be secured by paid 
solicitors at cost of $165. Total cost of 
printing and circulating petition, $1,400. 
Measures all adopted by about same vote 
as for presidential primary, which was 
46,620 yes, 12,143 no, 73% voting on 
measures. Authority, M. McCusker, 
Livingston, Mont., Secretary of League. 
In 1912 the People's Power 
Oklahoma. League, which has members 
in every voting precinct of 
the state, initiated a law providing for 
the Oregon "Statement No. 1" method of 
choosing United States Senators. Eight 
per cent, 20,387 signatures, required. 
Cash cost in addition to volunteer work, 
$1,200. Law adopted 1912. Vote, 139,- 
844 yes, 23,400 no; at special election 
called by legislature for other measures 
also. One hundred per cent, voted on 
measure. Authority, Hon. Campbell 
Russell, Warner, Okla., President of 
League. 

In 1910 the Direct Primary 
Maine. League initiated a direct primary 
law for the state. It had the ac- 
tive assistance of the Farmers' Grange, 
which is well organized and powerful in 
Maine. Twelve thousand flat signatures 
were required. Cash cost in addition to 
volunteer work, $500. Law adopted, 
election 1911; 65,810 yes, 21,774 no; 62% 
voting on measure. Authority, Christo- 
pher M. Gallup, Skowhegan, Maine, office 
of League. 

In 1910 citizens who desired 

Missouri, to see the university supported 

by a direct tax initiated an 

amendment to that effect. The move- 



ment had good support and a large 
amount of volunteer work was done by 
friends of the movement. Five per cent., 
34,700 names, were required, and it cost 
$2,000 to complete the petition by paid 
solicitors. Measure rejected, 181,659 yes, 
344,274 no, being 78% of total vote. Au- 
thority, Nebraska Legislative Reference 
Bureau. 

In 1912 the State Federa- 
Arkansas. tion of Labor, in conjunction 
with the State Farmers' 
Union, initiated a constitutional amend- 
ment for the Recall. Eight per cent., 
11,500 signatures, necessary. Seventy- 
five per cent, secured by volunteer un- 
paid effort. Cash cost to complete, $800. 
Law adopted, election 1912; 71,946 yes, 
58,721 no, 77% voting on measure. Au- 
thority, L. H. Moore, Little Rock, Ark., 
Secretary State Federation of Labor. 

In 1912 the Colorado Direct 
Colorado. Legislation League initiated ten 
important measures, most of 
which had been rejected by the legisla- 
ture, some several times. Among them 
were a public utilities bill, mother's com- 
pensation, recall, recall of decisions, 
headless ballot, eight-hour day for wo- 
men, etc. The League has several hun- 
dred members, including some of the 
most active and influential men in the 
state. Eight per cent., 16,500 signa- 
tures, were required. Of the task 
in getting the signatures Hon. George 
E. Hosmer, chairman of the Finance 
Committee of the League, writes: "We 
spent hundreds of dollars in cor- 
respondence in an effort to get these 
petitions circulated by voluntary circu- 
lators and finally had to spend over 
$2,000 in payment of circulators before 
we secured the required signatures." 
Eight of these measures were adopted 
by enormous majorities, ranging from 
35% to 54% of the total vote. 

In 1913 the Voters' Legis- 

Nebraska. lative League undertook a 

referendum on an act of the 

legislature which was a starter in build- 



84 

ing armories at military towns. Ten per 
cent., 25,100 signatures, required. Last 
10,000 secured by hiring solicitors at ex- 
pense of $700 to come within ninety-day 
limit. Measure to be voted on in 1914. 
Authority, W. L. Locke, Lincoln, Neb., 
officer of League. 

In 1910 the "Committee of 
Illinois. Seven," appointed by the 
Peoria Conference, initiated a 
petition under the Public Opinion Law 
for three propositions, viz. : Shall the 
legislature (1) Submit the Initiative and 
Referendum, (2) Enact a Corrupt Prac- 
tices Act, (3) Extend the Civil Service. 
Ten per cent., 115,475 signatures, neces- 
sary, but no verification or notary seals 
required. Several organizations helped. 
Two powerful newspapers and 2,800 vol- 
unteer workers turned in petitions. Three 
months' work. Cash cost to complete, 
$7,000. The advisory vote was 945,711 
yes, 447,908 no, 61% voting on measures. 
The legislature refused to enact. Au- 
thority, Dr. Maurice Doty, Chicago, 111., 
active in the work. 

Here are some opin- 
Some Opinions off j ons by men who are 
Men Who Know, friends of popular gov- 
ernment who have had 
actual experience with the workings of 
the Initiative and Referendum and who 
are not afraid of the judgment of the 
people : 



Judge Will R. King, former member 
of the Oregon Supreme Court: 
"To prevent payment for circulating 
petitions would be a ruinous policy from 
the standpoint of any one favoring the 
direct legislation system. It would make 
impractical either the Initiative or Refer- 
endum. Under such a change the 
wealthy class only would be able to 
contribute the time and labor essential 
to securing the necessary petitions, with 
the result that we would encounter the 
same difficulty in securing progressive 
legislation as under the old system. In 
my judgment, no reason can be ad- 



Equity 

vanced against proper compensation for 
circulation of petitions that could not 
successfully be invoked against the pay- 
ment of any other expense leading up 
to any reform, including expenses of 
speakers, rent of halls, etc., so often 
found necessary in order to bring about 
desired legislation." 

William S. U'Ren, Father of the Ore- 
gon System : 

"There is just enough truth in the 
reports of fictitious and forged names 
on Initiative and Referendum petitions 
to justify the enemies of popular gov- 
ernment raising a howl ... ; if the 
solicitation of signatures by paid circu- 
lators had been unlawful in Oregon, 
not one of our measures would have 
been submitted to the people. It is the 
knowledge of this fact that makes 
the enemies of direct legislation so 
unanimous and so enthusiastic for the 
abolition of the right to employ paid 
solicitors." 

Hon. George E. Hosmer, Denver, Col., 
chairman Legislative Committee Colo- 
rado Direct Legislation League : 
"The experience we have had in Colo- 
rado demonstrates the absolute neces- 
sity of having the privilege of hiring 
solicitors if we are to get the benefits 
of the Initiative and Referendum. 
Plenty of men are willing to help by 
donations for the purpose of enacting 
laws that they are interested in when 
they could not leave their business or 
regular employment, to go out and 
solicit signatures." 

Congressman J. A. Falconer, of Wash- 
ington : 

"The law passed in my state prohibit- 
ing the employment of solicitors and 
making it a gross misdemeanor for any 
reform, or other organization, to receive 
aid from outside the state in promoting 
any legislation, no matter how meritori- 
ous, was passed under the hostile influ- 
ence of men and with the consent of a 
governor who had never lifted a finger 



The March of 
Popular Government 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall 

to aid us in our fight to secure the 
Initiative and Referendum. It will 
seriously hamper, if not destroy, the 
effectiveness of our system until we can 
get it repealed. I hope the friends of 
popular government in other states will 
not be deceived by sophistry and false 
alarms, but will inform themselves and 
fight the efforts of our tricky opponents 
and false friends to defeat us by indi- 
rection." 



85 



Hon. Robert Crosser, Congressman-at- 
Large from Ohio; Chairman of Initi- 
ative and Referendum Committee of 
Ohio Constitutional Convention: 
"It is proposed in Ohio to prohibit, 
by law, the hiring of solicitors to se- 
cure signatures to Initiative and Refer- 
endum petitions. This proposition is 
absolutely inimical to the successful 
working of the Initiative and Refer- 
endum, and is as unsound in principle 
as it would be dangerous in practice. 
There should be the broadest and clear- 
est authority for the paying of persons 
to solicit signatures to petitions. No 
true friend of the principle will doubt 
the soundness or great practical benefit 
of the proposition, if he gives it any 
consideration." 

Hon. Robert L. Owen, United States 
Senator from Oklahoma, President of 
the National Popular Government 
League : 

"Let no one be deceived by the de- 
mand to prohibit the payment of honest 
solicitors, or by any other 'joker' put 
forth ostensibly to 'protect' the Initi- 
ative and Referendum, but which in 
practice would prohibit their use. Put 
forgers and perjurers in jail, but leave 
honest men free to fight for progress. 

"I know of no state official demanding 
10% state-wide petitions for their 
nomination, that their petitions be left 
at court houses to be signed by 'those 
interested,' or prohibiting themselves 
from paying solicitors in order to pro- 
tect the direct primary." 



Arkansas. 

Notwithstanding that the constitution 
of Arkansas has been amended to pro- 
vide for the Initiative and Referendum 
on a workable basis, there are signs of 
a movement for a constitutional con- 
vention to revise that instrument. Ac- 
cording to press dispatches within the 
past quarter, a number of "prominent 
citizens" have begun to agitate for such 
a convention, or for petitioning the 
legislature to call one. This agitation 
is regarded with some distrust by the 
defenders of the Initiative and Refer- 
endum amendment, and we are reminded 
of a similar effort made in Oregon 
several years ago, for a constitutional 
convention there. The Oregon agitation 
was started by the enemies of the I. 
and R. as a last resort. In this way 
they hoped, by gaining control of the 
proposed convention, to upset and de- 
stroy the I. and R. feature of the con- 
stitution. That movement failed. The 
great bulk of the voters were so well 
satisfied in the possession of these new 
means of expressing the popular will, 
and so well informed as to the sources 
of the agitation for revision, that they 
defeated the proposition for a conven- 
tion by a popular vote of nearly three 
to one. The present agitation in Ar- 
kansas may be regarded in the light of 
Oregon's experience. 

The question of publicity for legis- 
lative action, either through the repre- 
sentative forms, or by means of the 
Initiative and Referendum, has been 
raised by the proposal of a law requir- 
ing the publication, in one newspaper of 
each county, of a synopsis of all laws 
enacted by the legislature or proposed 
under the Initiative and Referendum. 
The law would also require similar pub- 
lication of the important orders of the 



86 



Equity 



railroad commission, information about 
assessments, about claims against coun- 
ties or districts and other matters of 
public interest. This bill was favor- 
ably discussed at the meeting of the 
Arkansas Press Association and has re- 
ceived the quite general endorsement 
of the newspaper publishers. 

The fact that these publishers would 
have a pecuniary interest in the oper- 
ation of such a law, through payments 
from the state treasury for advertising 
space in their papers, may have noth- 
ing to do with their advocacy of this 
measure, but our limited experience with 
human nature would suggest the pro- 
priety of examining somewhat closely 
into this matter of motive. If the news- 
papers are, as they claim to be, the 
tribunes of the people, ever standing 
guard for the truth and the public wel- 
fare, then certainly it would seem to 
come within the province of their news 
function to publish reports of all legis- 
lative or executive acts having any con- 
siderable importance to the people of 
the state or any part of the state di- 
rectly concerned. As a matter of fact, 
the papers do now cover these acts as 
a part of their province as news pur- 
veyors. 

On the other hand, it may be said 
with positiveness that the use of news- 
paper publicity in the form of paid ad- 
vertisements as a means of bringing 
measures before the people, under the 
Initiative and Referendum, has not 
proved to be efficient, and has been 
found to be too expensive in consider- 
ation of the results obtained. The use 
of official pamphlets containing authori- 
tative copies of propositions submitted, 
and signed statements and arguments 
both for and against each proposition, 
has proved to be the more satisfactory 
method. 

Considerable confusion regarding the 
application of the I. and R. amendment 
in Arkansas was created by the de- 
cision of the State Court in December 



to the effect that the amendment was 
not intended to give these popular in- 
struments to municipalities. Attorney- 
General Moose points out, however, that 
the legislative act of 1913 expressly gives 
to municipalities the right to initiate or 
refer ordinances, with the exception of 
measures pertaining to the maintenance 
of the city government, for expense de- 
ficiencies, for the exercise of police 
power or for the relief of persons in 
distress. He also expresses the opinion 
that this law will be sustained by the 
courts. 

California. 

Being a voter in the state of Cali- 
fornia in this year of grace is not 
likely to make a citizen (man or woman) 
indifferent to the responsibilities of gov- 
ernment. Nor will the average voter in 
this great commonwealth be likely to 
get the kind of peace of mind that 
comes from indifference and a stupid 
dependence upon party machine bosses 
or their masters, the men representing 
big business interests. Already the hot- 
test kind of a campaign is in progress 
throughout the state on several of the 
important questions which are to be 
submitted to the voters in November 
under the Initiative and Referendum 
laws, such as prohibition, the universal 
eight-hour day, abolition of death 
penalty, "red-light abatement," abolition 
of poll tax, and so on. At the top of 
the list, from the standpoint of popular 
interest of course, stands the liquor 
measure. 

The so-called "red-light" abatement 
bill, under which the owners of houses 
used for vicious purposes may be forced 
to make evictions, was temporarily held 
up by charges of forgery in connection 
with the signatures on the Referendum 
petition. This incident has started anew 
the discussion on the means for pro- 
tecting petitions from fraud, and the 
next legislature is expected to deal with 
this question. 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall 87 

One of the most striking features of 
this issue contains a highly significant 
message to the state of Utah. It is 
entitled, "Why Not Take Delaware Out 
of the Utah Class?" and is arranged in 
parallel columns as follows : 



Colorado. 

The one notable expression of the 
popular will in this state during the 
quarter was the Denver City special 
election of February 17th, in which an 
initiated measure calling for a 20% cut 
in water rates was adopted. The City 
Council, on March 9th, passed an 
ordinance carrying into effect the will 
of the people. Whether the water com- 
pany will submit to this cut in rates 
without appealing to the courts remains 
to be seen, but efforts were begun to 
make some arrangement that would sat- 
isfy the stock and bond holders of the 
company. 

The Colorado Service League is circu- 
lating petitions for several new and im- 
portant measures, one of which would 
apply the commission government idea to 
the state. This is drawn by Judge Ben 
Lindsey. Other measures thus proposed 
include the creation of a commission to 
draw a law code for women and chil- 
dren, to permit civil procedure against 
certain offenders and probation for 
adults, also to revise the whole jury 
system. 

Delaware. 

The continued activity of the Dela- 
ware Referendum League, especially 
through the publication of its quarterly 
news-letter, has resulted in the organi- 
zation of several local leagues, and in 
a lively discussion of the whole I., R. 
and R. question in leading papers of 
the state. The latest number of the 
Delaware Referendum News has on its 
cover a cartoon, reprinted from the 
Philadelphia North American, represent- 
ing the Initiative and Referendum as 
two very aggressive dogs in the act of 
keeping the municipal "gangster" up a 
tree. The labor unions also have been 
stirred to new activities, for it is re- 
ported that a number of them have 
raised funds to carry along the work 
of the Referendum League, these funds 
passing through the Central Labor 
Union. 



"IN UTAH 

"In the state of 
Utah in 1900, the 
people voted 19,- 
219 to 8,786 for 
the Initiative and 
Referendum. The 
Legislature has 
never carried that 
vote into effect. 

"Utah voted 
against the amend- 
ment to the Fed- 
eral Constitution 
permitting direct 
election of U. S. 
Senators. 



"IN DELAWARE 

"The people 
voted for the Ini- 
tiative and Refer- 
endum in 1907. 
Every succeeding 
Legislature has 
failed to make ef- 
fective the will of 
the people thus ex- 
pressed. 

"Delaware voted 
against the amend- 
ment to the Fed- 
eral Constitution 
permitting direct 
election of U. S. 



Senators. 
"No other state rejected the amend- 
ment for direct election of senators." 

Beginning a series of "Straight Talks 
for Live Citizens of All Parties," this 
number contains a display advertisement 
running as follows : 

"Who's Boss in Delaware? 

"Who decides how the public 
moneys shall be raised and how spent? 

"Do the laws enacted at Dover give 
you and your neighbors what you 
most want, what the State most needs, 
or what it ought to have, without 
waste or extravagance? 

"The Answer: You and your neigh- 
bor, the intelligent men and women of 
Delaware, are the boss of your state — 
but you are not on the job! You 
have no means of giving orders to 
your lawmakers directly. The law- 
makers take their orders from big 
business interests. 

"You are still letting the few big 
financial interests have their way with 
your state by playing one party dummy 
against another. 

"Learn how easily, effectively and 
safely these conditions may be changed 
without doing violence to any of the 
principles of representative govern- 
ment." 



Illinois. 

"A constitutional convention in Illinois 
has become a sure thing," writes one 
correspondent from Chicago. Since the 
first of the year the sentiment for a 
revision of the out-worn fundamental 
law of the Prairie State has gained 
great headway. Prominent among those 
who are promoting this movement are 
George E. Cole, of Chicago; Senator 
Edward C. Curtis, Representative Medill 
McCormick, Charles A. Karch, of Bel- 
ville, and Norman G. Flagg, of Moro. 
They have organized tne Constitutional 
Convention League of Illinois. In the 
Chicago Record-Herald a series of il- 
luminating articles explaining the need 
of a new constitution has been written 
by Arthur M. Evans, who advocates the 
immediate removal of the one-amend- 
ment-at-a-time barrier. 

In the city of Chicago an election is 
to be held on April 7th at which a num- 
ber of local government and franchise 
propositions will be submitted to the 
decision of the voters. 

Indiana. 

The Hoosier State has for many years 
been justly proud of its common-school 
system ; also of its higher institutions of 
learning. The Indiana University, at 
Bloomington, has an exceedingly live 
Department of Debating and Public 
Discussion, in charge of Ross F. Lock- 
ridge, who would be an asset to any insti- 
tution or state. The June 15, 1913, issue 
of the Indiana University Bulletin is 
devoted to the Extension Division of 
the last-named department, and it gives 
prominence to the importance of the 
question, "Are you in favor of a Con- 
stitutional Convention in the year IQ15?" 
which will be voted on in the November 
election, 1914. As the old (present) 
constitution, made in 1851, requires that 
a question submitted must receive a ma- 
jority of all the votes cast in the elec- 
tion, it is likely to be lost by the votes 
of all those who vote for candidates but 



Equity 
fail 



to vote on this question being 
counted against it. This is an archaism 
that exists in a number of old state con- 
stitutions. On this account an active 
campaign must be made in Indiana on 
this one point in order to bring out a 
large favorable vote, or the convention 
will be lost. 

The interest of the student body and 
of the department above mentioned 
under Mr. Lockridge, is further exempli- 
fied in the January, 1914, issue of the 
Bulletin, which gives much information 
about the 1851 constitutional convention, 
the constitution made then and attempts 
to amend it since, and the speeches of 
eight students in an interclass discus- 
sion contest on the subject, "A New 
Constitution for Indiana." If the voters 
of Indiana, the leaders of the political 
parties, the newspapers, the professional 
men, etc., were as wideawake, progress- 
ive and well informed as those stu- 
dents, Indiana would not now be one 
of the most backward states in the 
Union in regard to improved processes 
of government. With this progressive 
institution in the heart of the state, 
spreading its influence and help to Civic 
Discussion Clubs throughout the state, 
the old order cannot remain much longer. 
This is decidedly the most promising 
thing in Indiana at the present time. 

Another encouraging piece of news 
from Indiana is that the United Mine 
Workers of America, in session at In- 
dianapolis on January 26th, unanimously 
indorsed the L, R. and R., and La Fol- 
lette's "gateway" amendment to the 
United States Constitution, providing for 
an easier method of amending that in- 
strument. As the above organization is 
a national one, this expression cannot 
be considered an Indiana expression, but 
its meeting was in Indiana and its head- 
quarters are there, and many of its 
members live in the state. 

Now we come to the other side. The 
dominant party in Indiana is hard to 
budge from its old tracks. It balks even 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall 



89 



at direct primaries. On March 15th the 
Democratic delegation in Congress "de- 
cided not to recommend that the Demo- 
cratic state convention adopt a direct 
primary plank in its platform." But 
Senator Kern took to the convention 
letters from President Wilson and Sec- 
retary Bryan indorsing direct primaries, 
and he and Senator Shively and Con- 
gressmen Cullop, Barnhart and Adair 
spoke before the Committee on Reso- 
lutions in favor of a direct primary 
plank. The committee, controlled by 
Mr. Tom Taggert, was opposed. Only 
one of the 13 members really favored 
the plank, but after an all-night ses- 
sion a favorable vote of 7 to 6 was 
obtained. Mayor Bell, of Indianapolis, 
chairman of the committee, said that the 
7 members, "instead of being con- 
structive for the party, had become its 
pallbearers, for, without the convention 
system, the party's organization would 
go to pieces." 

There we have it from the politicians' 
point of view. And perhaps they are 
right. Maybe direct primaries would 
disrupt their organization. So much the 
better for the people. Party organi- 
zation has been too good, too perfect, 
too efficient, in Indiana. Perhaps that 
is the reason that there is not a com- 
mission-governed city or town in Indi- 
ana. What is the reason that it is im- 
possible to get any improved system of 
city government in Indiana? Ask Mr. 
Theo. F. Thieme, of Fort Wayne. He 
will tell you that it is too much political 
machine. These machines stand in the 
way of any political progress in Indi- 
ana. If direct primaries would disrupt 
the party machines, it would be the first 
step toward progressive government in 
Indiana. We cannot hope for the I., R. 
and R. in a state in which the direct 
primary is such a bitter pill to those 
who have been accustomed to ruling. 
But, once the political machines, which 
have gripped the affairs of Indiana so 
long, make up their minds that they 



must let go, this interesting state may 
plunge to the front with startling sud- 
denness, and may yet become the model 
progressive state. So mote it be. 

Maryland. 

If the people of Maryland shall not 
have this year the opportunity to add the 
Initiative and Referendum to their con- 
stitution, it cannot be said that the sub- 
ject was not fully discussed and con- 
sidered by the legislature nearing its 
close at the time we write this. A con- 
stitutional amendment, which passed the 
Senate unanimously on March 27th, was 
the much-altered net result of a measure 
known as the Ogderi bill, introduced by 
Senator William J. Ogden, of Balti- 
more, containing several novel and 
original features. In its thus curtailed 
form this amendment leaves out the 
Initiative entirely, and provides for the 
referring of laws passed by the as- 
sembly upon a petition signed by 10,000 
voters, of whom not more than half 
may be residents of Baltimore or any 
other county. But in the case of local 
laws, the number of signers must be 
8% of the registered voters in the city 
or district concerned. 

One of the distinctive features of the 
Ogden bill, which was retained, excepts 
all measures concerning the sale or 
manufacture of intoxicating liquors from 
the operation of the Referendum. Also 
the question of increasing representation 
in the legislature is excepted. 

The most original and distinctive 
feature of the Ogden bill, as introduced, 
was omitted. That was the proposal 
that the signatures of a majority of the 
members of the legislature to any peti- 
tion would be sufficient to require the 
submission of a measure to a vote of 
the people, and that if less than a ma- 
jority of the members sign the petition 
to initiate or refer a measure, each sig- 
nature would be equivalent to a number 
found by dividing the bare majority 
of the house "into half the number of 



90 

signatures of voters 
petition. This idea received a great 
deal of discussion and undoubtedly 
merits serious study on the part of all 
friends of popular government. On the 
plan contemplated by Senator Ogden, the 
Initiative or Referendum would prob- 
ably be made more useable and yet be 
less open to the charge of interfering 
with the existing representative form 
of government. In the House another 
I. and R. bill was introduced by Dele- 
gate Addison which did not contain this 
original feature, nor did it except the 
liquor question, but this measure did not 
come to a vote. 

It was during the pendency of these 
measures that Secretary of State Bryan, 
on March 11th, addressed the legislature 
in joint session, and strongly advocated 
their enactment. Secretary Bryan in 
that address said that he believed that 
there is more "virtue in the people" than 
ever finds expression in their repre- 
sentatives. He further opined that a 
representative should not violate his 
conscience, whether in public or private 
affairs, and that when he feels that he 
cannot do what his constituents want 
him to do, he should return his com- 
mission. Thereon he added : 

"I believe the crime of misrepresen- 
tation is greater than private embezzle- 
ment; and when you get misrepre- 
sentation your office-holder can laugh 
at you while he is drawing a salary 
from the treasury and doing as he 
pleases. 

"You need not be afraid to change 
your opinion on the question of the 
Initiative and Referendum. 

"President Wilson changed his opin- 
ion and was not ashamed. He said he 
had for years been teaching the stu- 
dents at Princeton that the Initiative 
and Referendum were wrong, but when 
he found he was wrong he was not 
ashamed to say so." 

It was also in connection with this 
address that Secretary Bryan expressed 
the hope that in time this country would 
adopt the postal vote plan of New 
Zealand which permits a citizen, though 



Equity 

sufficient for a away from home, to cast his vote by the 
use of the mails and have it counted. 

Later: At the last moment before 
going to press comes this definite infor- 
mation about the passage of the Refer- 
endum amendment by the Maryland 
lower house and about two other amend- 
ments to be submitted this year. 

Washington, D. C, April 6, 1914. 
Dr. Charles F. Taylor, Philadelphia, Pa.: 

My Dear Doctor: — The Maryland Legisla- 
ture has voted for submission to the people 
an excellent Referendum provision. The Ini- 
tiative only failed because of the lack of one 
vote in the Senate. This Referendum amend- 
ment went through 23 to 3 in the State Senate 
and 68 to 19 in the House. There will also be 
submitted to the people a Home Rule amend- 
ment providing for local self-government in the 
Counties and the City of Baltimore. There will 
have to be some enabling legislation under this, 
but it is most excellent. This went through 
the Senate practically unanimously and the 
House unanimously. 

There is also to be submitted a constitutional 
amendment providing for the classification of 
personal property, and the determination by the 
Legislature and the several counties, of the 
particular classes upon which taxes will be 
levied, the rule of uniformity being clearly 
within each separate class. 

With these three amendments adopted by the 
people, as we may expect they will be, Mary- 
land will be on the most progressive footing 
of any state west of the Mississippi River. I 
hope to be able to send you the exact text of 
all of these amendments within a day or two. 
Very truly yours, 

J. H. Ralston. 



Massachusetts. 

Spurred forward by the goad of pub- 
lic opinion, as expressed last November 
in the election of Governor Walsh and 
in the fact that Bird, the Progressive 
candidate, ran second, the present legis- 
lature of Massachusetts is giving heed 
to the popular demand for certain funda- 
mental improvements in the processes of 
government. A great deal of attention 
has been given to the proposal for a 
constitutional convention and also to a 
proposed amendment for the Initiative 
and Referendum on a satisfactory basis 
of operation. Up to this writing no 
final action has been taken as to either 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall 



91 



of these measures, although the house 
has acted favorably upon the consti- 
tutional convention resolution. 

One of the surprising features of the 
house line-up was the assistance given 
by the Republican floor leader, Chan- 
ning Cox, to the friends of the measure, 
notwithstanding that the committee on 
constitutional amendments had reported 
adversely. The proposal for a con- 
vention received 112 affirmative votes 
to 87 negative. The rank and file of 
the Republicans did not follow the lead 
of Cox, however. 

At the outset of the session, Governor 
Walsh, in his inaugural address, said 
that the time had come for the Initi- 
ative and Referendum. He argued that 
the elected legislators and the executive 
are merely their temporary agents in 
performing duties delegated to them. 

Later, on February 24th, Governor 
Walsh took the unusual course of ap- 
pearing in person before a committee 
of the legislature, to join with Lewis 
J. Johnson, of Harvard, and Joseph 
Walker, the Progressive Party leader, 
in advocating immediate favorable action 
on a constitutional amendment providing 
for the Initiative and Referendum. He 
said that he sympathized with this move- 
ment so heartily that he deemed it his 
duty to appear thus in person and plead 
with the committee "to give the peo- 
ple the power over acts of public officials 
which the Initiative and Referendum 
guarantees to them." He further de- 
clared that such an amendment would 
prove "more powerful than any anti- 
lobby legislation" and "would be de- 
structive of more of the evils that exist 
to-day than any other reform." In this 
connection he remarked : "No movement 
in our time indicates a greater interest 
in the problem of government upon the 
part of the people themselves than the 
movement in favor of the Initiative and 
Referendum." He showed how this 
movement had begun with the direct 
primary, had been followed with the 



popular election of senators and corrupt 
practise laws. But the last and most 
important work of all, he contended, re- 
mains to be done; namely, that of giv- 
ing the people "the last say in vetoing 
bad laws" or in initiating good laws 
when necessary. 

On March 9th President Lowell, of 
Harvard University, appeared before the 
same committee of the legislature and 
opposed the contemplated Initiative and 
Referendum amendment to the consti- 
tution in an elaborate argument. Refer- 
ence to this argument will be found in 
another article in this issue of Equity. 

In several instances, enemies of the 
Initiative and Referendum principle have 
sought to bring discredit upon it by 
using it as a subterfuge in escaping re- 
sponsibility for certain measures of 
doubtful merit, by attaching to them a 
clause making their operation contingent 
on the approval of the particular com- 
munity concerned. One such was a 
measure granting two weeks' vacation 
with pay to municipal laborers, but mak- 
ing it operative only in cities where a 
majority of the voters accepted it. In 
view of this tendency, a letter written 
by Mr. Joseph Walker to the Boston 
Herald entitled, "The Abuse of the 
Referendum," and appearing in that 
paper on March 24th, is worthy of a 
place in these columns. The letter is as 
follows : 

To the Editor of The Herald: — An edi- 
torial in your issue of March 24, 1914, im- 
pels me to express my views on the exer- 
cise of the power of general referendum, 
now for the first time intrusted to the Legis- 
lature. 

The frequent and unjust use of the 
referendum by the Legislature will utterly 
destroy its value and will inevitably lead 
to its repeal. To submit a large number 
of questions to the voters each year is it- 
self an evil, even if they be important 
questions. To submit questions in which 
voters generally take little interest and on 
which they have no real opinion to express 
leads to confusion and to bad legislation. 
It is for this reason that, in providing for 
the initiative and referendum it should be 
made reasonably difficult to get a question 
on the ballot. 

The referendum is intended to be an ex- 
traordinary procedure. Its value is very 
great if properly and sparingly used. The 
Legislature should not submit a question to 



92 



the voters at the behest of some special 
interest, like the liquor interest, nor at 
the behest of interested politicians, as in 
the case of the Boston charter matter, nor 
at the behest of any small group of agi- 
tators. Its use by legislators to shirk re- 
sponsibility sbould be severely rebuked. 

Whether the referendum is a good thing 
or a bad thing all depends upon whether 
or not it is properly used. This is true of 
all governmental machinery. 

As a strong believer in the referendum, 
I trust that the Legislature will not bring 
it into disrepute by its improper use. 

Joseph Walker. 

However, Mr. Walker misses the main 
point, which is that the Referendum 
should be invoked only by the voters of 
the community affected. True, the Mas- 
sachusetts legislature has just obtained 
the privilege of referring measures to 
voters, but the legislature should not 
abuse the privilege, and heap duties and 
responsibilities upon voters that they 
do not desire. Let the invoking be done 
by the voters, and do not make it too 
difficult for them to do so, and there 
will be no abuse of the Referendum. 

Michigan. 

The city of Detroit failed to rise to 
the occasion, when on February 10th its 
proposed new charter containing pro- 
visions for the Initiative, Referendum 
and Recall and other improvements was 
submitted to the voters under the new 
home-rule law. The result of this special 
election was the defeat of the proposed 
charter by a vote of 15,952 for to 25,245 
against the proposition. The total vote 
was more than half that cast in the last 
presidential election. 

The defeat of this charter did not, 
however, affect the municipal ownership 
of street railways and other public 
utilities which were provided for in the 
charter, for these powers already have 
been given to the city through the 
operation of a law enacted at the last 
session of the legislature, and which 
later was declared valid by the Supreme 
Court of the state. 

After a stubborn fight with its City 
Council over the question of whether 
the voters of Grand Rapids should be 
given an opportunity to say whether or 



Equity 

not they desired a new charter, those 
voters proceeded to initiate a bill for a 
new charter, although the Council had 
twice peremptorily refused the request 
for such submission. Sufficient signers 
were obtained without difficulty, and the 
election was set for March 17th. 

That proposal to revise the charter 
of Grand Rapids was defeated by a 
majority vote of 100 votes in a total 
exceeding 18,000 votes. Commenting on 
this result, Mr. A. H. Vandenberg, 
editor of the Grand Rapids Herald, who 
took the lead in this fight for charter 
revision on I. and R. lines, writes us 
as follows : 



"Personally I consider this a splendid show- 
ing. The fact that we came within a mere 
handful of votes of winning the day shows 
that much progress has been made for charter 
reform in Grand Rapids public opinion, in 
view of the fact that the last previous refer- 
endum on a new charter showed a hopeless 
majority in the negative." 



Mississippi. 

At next November's election the voters 
of Mississippi will become their own 
masters if on that day they add to their 
constitution the Initiative and Refer- 
endum amendment which the legislature 
of the state has submitted to them. This 
amendment, as finally passed by the leg- 
islature, is exceedingly well drawn and 
entirely lacking in those objectionable 
features, or "jokers," which have made 
I. and R. amendments nearly or quite 
inoperative in certain states. For the 
use of the Initiative, 7,500 "legal voters" 
are required. In order to refer a meas- 
ure passed by the legislature, a petition 
must be signed by at least 6,000 "legal 
voters." Elections for I. and R. meas- 
ures shall be held "at the next regular 
election" unless the legislative body calls 
a special election. The Governor may 
not veto measures initiated by or re- 
ferred to the people. An emergency 
measure requires a three-fourths vote. 
Petitions may be submitted in part, but 
each part of a petition shall have at- 
tached the sworn affidavit of the person 
circulating same respecting the au- 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall 



93 



thenticity of the signatures. The secre- 
tary of state shall decide any question 
as to the sufficiency of the signatures. 

In order to adopt this amendment, as 
framed, it will be necessary for it to 
receive a majority of all the votes cast 
in the election, and not merely a ma- 
jority of those voting on this question. 
It was this requirement that caused the 
failure of an I. and R. amendment in 
1912 (see page 47 of January, 1913, 
Equity), when the vote was 25,153 for 
and 13,383 against, or a majority of 
nearly two to one on the question sub- 
mitted. Still the fact that it was barely 
short of a majority of the total vote 
cast for candidates prevented the suc- 
cess of the measure at that time; hence 
the importance of conducting a vigorous 
and enthusiastic campaign for the meas- 
ure this year. 

Representative N. A. Mott, who fa- 
thered both the 1912 amendment and that 
which has just been submitted, hopes 
now to have the satisfaction of seeing 
the efforts of himself and his associ- 
ates crowned with success. 

When the resolution to submit the 
amendment had passed the senate on 
March 20th, after having previously 
passed the house, a number of the sup- 
porters of the resolution organized a 
People's Rule League for the purpose of 
carrying on an educational campaign be- 
tween now and election day through- 
out the state. Caut. Frank Burkitt, 
of Okalona, was chosen president, and 
N. A. Mott, of Yazoo City, secretary. 
The league adopted a declaration of 
principles concerning fundamental de- 
mocracy as taught by Jefferson, and 
began at once to work not only for the 
Initiative and Referendum, but also 
for a presidential primary and ultimately 
for the direct election of the president 
of the United States, also for the sub- 
mission by congress of a "gateway" 
amendment to the Federal Constitution 
removing "the obstacles by which an 
absurdly small minority can prevent a 



submission or adoption of needed 
changes and to establish a method of 
amendment by which the Federal Con- 
stitution may be responsive to the will 
of the American people." 

Near the close of the session a bill 
providing for the Initiative, Referendum 
and Recall in municipalities passed both 
houses and was signed by the Gov- 
ernor. At this writing we have not the 
details of this law at hand. 

The proposal for a constitutional con- 
vention was defeated. 

Nebraska. 

Recent events in the home state of 
William J. Bryan go far toward dis- 
approving an impression recently given 
publicity to the effect that the Initiative 
and Referendum amendment in that 
state is virtually a dead letter. It is 
true that the conditions for the oper- 
ation of the Nebraska law are more dif- 
ficult than in some states, and undoubt- 
edly those conditions should be made 
considerably easier. Ten per cent, of 
the voters to initiate a measure is un- 
necessarily high, but in addition to that, 
this law requires at least two-fifths of 
the counties (36) to furnish each 5% 
of the signatures on a given petition. 
Under the Nebraska constitution a 
proposition is enacted if it gets a ma- 
jority of those voting thereon, provid- 
ing that the majority amounts to 45% 
of the total number of votes cast at the 
election. 

Nevertheless, several measures of im- 
portance are going on the Nebraska 
ballot next November. Of these, Secre- 
tary of State Wait writes us as follows : 

Department of State. 

Lincoln, Neb., March 14, 1914. 

Mr. C. F. Taylor, 1520 Chestnut St., 
Philadelphia, Pa.: 

Dear Sir: — Replying to your favor 
of the t2th instant, would advise that 
an initiative and referendum law was 
passed at the last session of the legis- 
lature in 1913, and the first proposi- 



94 



Equity 



tions to be voted upon under that law 
will be at the coming November elec- 
tion. There are two initiative and two 
referendum propositions, as follows : 
Initiative for location of the State Uni- 
versity, and equal suffrage. The refer- 
endum on the employers' liability act and 
an appropriation of $20,000 for building 
an armory at Nebraska City. 
Yours truly, 

Addison Wait, 
Secretary of State. 

Despite the efforts of the Omaha and 
Council Bluffs Street Railway Company 
to upset the Initiative and Referendum 
law in order to prevent a special elec- 
tion called for the submission of an 
ordinance initiated by the voters of 
Omaha to require the selling of 7 tickets 
for 25 cents, that election was held on 
March 10th and the proposal was car- 
ried. 

Senator Norris on Nebraska. 

From no less a distinguished authority 
than Senator Norris, of Nebraska, we 
have received very recently an interest- 
ing letter bearing on the status of the 
I. and R. amendment to the Nebraska 
constitution. This letter is as follows : 

March 21, 1914. 
To the Editor of "Equity," 1520 Chestnut St., 

Philadelphia, Pa.: 

My Dear Sir : — I have your recent letter 
in which you request my views as to the 
actual operation of the Initiative and Refer- 
endum in Nebraska, and as to the general 
sentiment of the Nebraska people as to this 
provision. 

My official duties have permitted me to 
spend so little time in Nebraska since the 
adoption of the Initiative and Referendum 
amendment that I have had no opportunity 
to actually observe operations thereunder. 
I understand the required petitions for a 
submission of an equal suffrage amendment 
has been obtained and are ready to be filed 
with the proper official. I am reliably in- 
formed, however, that a very unpopular 
enactment by the Legislature will be per- 
mitted to stand because of the vast task 
imposed by the provisions of the law pre- 
scribing the number of signatures to be 
obtained and the territory to be covered 
in connection with a referendum petition. 

To initiate a measure under the Nebraska 
law the petition must contain the names of 
at least ten per cent, of the legal voters 
of the State, so distributed as to include 
five per cent, of the legal voters of each of 
two-fifths of the counties of the State. 

To initiate a Constitutional amendment 
the petition must contain the names of at 
least fifteen per cent, of the legal voters 
of the State, distributed as above. 

To obtain the submission of a referendum 



the petition must contain the names of at 
least ten per cent, of the legal voters of 
the state, distributed as above. 

In my judgment the law requires too 
large a percentage of the legal voters of the 
state in all of these cases, but a greater 
objection, so far as the actual operation 
of the law is concerned, is to be found 
in the provision requiring that the per- 
centage required must be distributed so as 
to include five per cent, of the legal voters 
of each of two-fifths of the counties of the 
State. With 93 counties in the State this 
provision involves a vast territory. These 
provisions will, it seems to me, practically 
defeat the purpose of the law by rendering 
it inoperative in a very large number of 
worthy cases. 

So far as local sentiment is concerned, 
there is I know a strong sentiment for 
an adequate and workable Initiative and 
Referendum provision. I have been in the 
State so little since the adoption of the 
amendment that I am not conversant with 
local opinion as to the provisions of the 
present law, but knowing something of the 
experiences they have had in trying to 
work under its provisions, I am inclined 
to believe the people will demand more 
workable requirements. Apparently, how- 
ever, they do not regard the present law a 
failure by any means. 

With kind regards, permit me to remain 
Very truly yours, 

G. W. Norris. 

New Jersey. 
A bill known as the "Chancellor- 
Sheriff" bill was referred to the voters 
by order of the legislature, and it was 
submitted at the election last November 
and carried by a large majority. Its 
constitutionality was then attacked, and 
Justice Swayze declared it unconstitu- 
tional, because that instrument specifies 
that only constitutional amendments may 
be submitted to the voters by the legis- 
lature. This decision was appealed to 
the Court of Errors and Appeals, where 
Justice Swayze's decision was reversed 
by a vote of 10 to 3. The majority de- 
cision holds that while the constitution 
does give express power to the legisla- 
ture to submit only constitutional amend- 
ments to the electorate, it nevertheless 
contains no prohibition against submit- 
ting the question as to whether or not 
an act passed by the legislature shall 
become operative. This decision estab- 
lishes in New Jersey the state-wide 
Referendum on questions submitted by 
the legislature. Now let the legislature 
submit a constitutional amendment per- 
mitting a reasonable number of the 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall 

voters, themselves, to demand a refer- 
endum to the entire electorate. 

The following clipping contains food 
for thought: 



95 



Trenton, N. J., Feb. 23.— When the eighth 
week of the present legislative session opens 
to-morrow there will be 640 measures in 
the hopper. Of these, 202 bills and 6 resolu- 
tions have appeared in the Senate and 421 bills 
and 11 resolutions in the Assembly. The Sen- 
ate has passed 28 bills, the Assembly 34, but 
only one bill has been passed on to Governor 
Fielder and signed by him. And that one, 
correcting the new jury law, was found to 
be defective and had to be repealed. 

In the Senate 77 bills have been reported out 
of committee and in the House 114 bills have 
passed the committee stage. 

That about tells the story of the seven weeks 
the Legislature has been in session. 

Add to the above that New Jersey is 
one of the six states that have annual 
legislative sessions. The other five are 
New York, Massachusetts, Georgia, 
Oklahoma and Rhode Island. Thus our 
states are law-ridden but poorly gov- 
erned. City governments are being 
revolutionized by substituting a small 
commission for the two chambers of 
councils. State government must be 
changed in the same general direction 
before it will become what it ought 
to be. 

A prominent and distressing feature 
of this session is a determination on 
the part of the old machine element of 
the Democratic Party, doubtless aided 
by Republican machine members, to in- 
jure (because they cannot entirely re- 
peal) the I., R. and R. features of the 
Walsh commission city government law. 
The attempts have been made in covert 
and indirect ways, so that the motives of 
the instigators will not be apparent. 
They have not succeeded yet, and it is 
sincerely to be hoped that they will not 
succeed. 

This development in New Jersey will 
suggest to leaders in other states the 
importance of reverting to the old plan 
of incorporating the local I. and R. in 
constitutional amendments for the state- 



wide I. and R. We gave this plan up 
when so many states granted the local 
I. and R. by statute. We seemed to 
think that was sufficient. It is an ex- 
cellent way to make rapid progress, but 
we now see the importance of also put- 
ting these powers, and the conditions 
under which they shall be exercised, be- 
yond the reach of the politicians by put- 
ting them into the constitution. 

Sufficient time having now elapsed, 
testimony is now coming out concerning 
the benefits of commission government 
of cities under the Walsh law. For ex- 
ample, the end of the first year of such 
experience in Trenton shows rapid ad- 
vance in economy and efficiency in city 
government ; lower taxes, budget less, 
partisan politics eliminated and public 
morals raised. 

New York, 

Not withstanding the forward impulse 
given to the movement for better gov- 
ernmental processes in New York by 
the measures adopted in December last 
at the extra session of the state legisla- 
ture, upon the recommendation of 
Governor Glynn (see January Equity, 
page 36), the legislative record of the 
regular session begun on January 7th 
and ended March 28th has been disap- 
pointing to the friends of the Initiative 
and Referendum. The expected coalition 
of Democrats and Progressives did not 
materialize to any extent in the assembly, 
where the chairmen of all important 
committees proved to be unresponsive 
to the demands of the people for the 
right to superintend their own affairs. 

The assembly even went so far as to 
vote, 98 to 42, for a bill repealing the 
law enacted in December for a refer- 
endum election on April 7th on the hold- 
ing of a constitutional convention in 
1915. One reason given for this action 
was that the question of holding a con- 
stitutional convention had never before 
been considered at a special election. 
Another reason advanced was that the 



96 



Equity 



date of registration was not placed ten 
days before the election, as required ,by 
the state constitution. It was also 
argued that a special election means an 
unnecessary expense. Governor Glynn 
and his advisers held that the proposed 
special election was valid, and the re- 
peal bill did not pass the senate. In 
view of the expected constitutional con- 
vention, no great effort was made to 
bring forward the state-wide Initiative 
and Referendum amendment, although 
one measure for that purpose was intro- 
duced by Assemblyman Murray. Near 
the end of the session the majority 
rushed through a bill requiring the use 
of the party-column ballot in the elec- 
tion of convention delegates. This may 
seriously injure the work of the con- 
vention by making it a partisan affair. 
The optional city bill, which was before 
the legislature of 1913 in a most desirable 
form, including provisions for the Initi- 
ative, Referendum and Recall on a care- 
ful and thoroughly workable basis, was 
again introduced at this session in both 
senate and assembly but completely di- 
vested of the I., R. and R. provisions. 
The Municipal Government Association 
of New York State consented to this 
mutilation of the measure upon the be- 
lief that, home rule being their object, 
a half a loaf was better than no loaf, 
and that at an early session the Initi- 
ative, Referendum and Recall checks 
might be added to the law. Walter T. 
Arndt, executive secretary of this asso- 
ciation, in a letter to the editor of 
Equity, explains that they consented to 
the elimination of the I., R. and R. 
provisions because they knew "they 
could not pass the measure so long as 
these provisions remain in it," and that 
"the establishment of the principle of 
home rule was worth accomplishing." 
This measure passed in the last week of 
the session. It provides for seven dif- 
ferent simplified forms of city govern- 
ment which any municipality may choose 
from by a referendum vote. 



An act to provide a charter for the 
city of Buffalo, which contained a good 
provision for the use of the Referendum, 
but not providing either for the Initi- 
ative or Recall, was authorized for sub- 
mission to the voters of that city, sub- 
ject to the approval of its executive, 
Mayor Fuhrmann. In disregard of a 
very general sentiment voiced by the 
people favorable to a decision of the 
matter by referendum, Mayor Fuhrmann 
vetoed the act. Thereupon mass meet- 
ings were held, and a determined effort 
was made to get the charter bill passed 
over the mayor's veto, which was done 
at the last moment. 

Another city charter bill even more 
liberal in its provisions than that for 
Buffalo was enacted by the legislature 
for the city of Olean. This charter 
authorizes the commission-manager plan 
with a commission of five citizens hav- 
ing power to appoint a "city manager." 
Provision is made for the Initiative and 
Referendum, but the Recall was left 
out. Proposed ordinances, except appro- 
priations, may be initiated on petitions 
of 10% of the registered voters who 
voted at the last municipal election. If 
the commission fails to act on such a 
measure within 30 days, or rejects it, 
or passes it in some different form than 
that asked for, said measure, upon the 
presentation of a petition with 15% 
additional voters, must be submitted to 
the electorate in its original form or 
with any proposed amendment, within 
20 days after the action of the commis- 
sion. Said measure shall be enacted if 
a majority of those voting thereon shall 
be in favor of it. Provision is also made 
for the referring of ordinances of the 
commission within 30 days after their 
passage, upon a petition signed by 
25% of the registered voters, except 
"emergency" measures, defined as being 
for the preservation of peace, property, 
health or safety, or "for the usual daily 
operation of a municipal department," 
which must be stated in a preamble. 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall 



97 



But, as emergency measures may be 
passed by the council or commission by 
a mere majority vote, the same as 
ordinary measures, the council may thus 
avoid a Referendum whenever it wishes 
to. This virtually destroys the Refer- 
endum. 

A bill providing for the appointment 
of the principal state officials by the 
governor, instead of their election, was 
pressed through the lower house, but 
was hung up in the senate because of 
an attempt to make the appointments 
subject to confirmation by that body. 
(For full explanation of this matter see 
under Short Ballot Department of this 
issue of Equity.) 

North Carolina. 
If the grown-up people of North 
Carolina have not learned something 
about the pros and cons of the Ref- 
erendum question, it is not the fault 
of the young men and women of the 
high schools of that state. On March 
20th, 600 of these high-school students 
in 150 different schools connected with 
what is known as the High School De- 
bating Union, took part in a debating 
contest in different towns and cities 
throughout the state on this question: 
"Shall the Constitution of North Caro- 
lina be so Amended as to Allow the 
Initiative and Referendum in State- Wide 
Legislation?" It was estimated that 
over 30,000 people attended these various 
debating contests, which were arranged 
in triangular groups of three schools 
each. 

It is safe to say that on that day this 
subject received more intelligent con- 
sideration and discussion in North Caro- 
lina than it has ever received on any 
one day in any other state of the union. 
These discussions had the advantage of 
being divorced from the heat of party 
prejudice or direct political responsi- 
bilities, so that the question could be 
considered strictly on its merits, whereas 
in the ordinary political contest, far too 



often, the merits of this question have 
been obscured by the ambitions of rival 
candidates or by the pressure of special 
interests involved. 

This High School Debating Union is 
carried on under the auspices of the 
Dialectic and Philanthropic societies and 
the Bureau of Extension of the Uni- 
versity of North Carolina. Through 
these agencies a large amount of mat- 
ter to be used in preparation for the 
debates, including one sixty-page publi- 
cation and several thousand congres- 
sional speeches and documents, were 
sent to the schools free of charge. 

Each school that won both of its tri- 
angular debates sent its teams to Chapel 
Hill on April 3d for the final contest 
for what is known as the Aycock 
Memorial Cup, the prize being provided 
for the winning school by the intercol- 
legiate debaters of the University. . The 
aim of the Extension Bureau in this 
work is the upbuilding of the Old North 
state and to make the boundaries of 
the campus co-extensive with the 
boundaries of the state. Great progress 
in this work has been made this year 
under the leadership of Acting-President 
E. K. Graham. 

Ohio. 

A new and important chapter in the 
story of Ohio's experience with the 
Initiative and Referendum as instru- 
ments of popular government has been 
written. The first year's experience with 
these instruments included a number of 
instances of irregularities or fraud in 
the procuring of signatures to Refer- 
endum petitions, as was recorded in the 
January Equity. It will be recalled that 
several of the petitions were held up 
by the Secretary of State because of 
those irregularities and that his position 
was sustained by the courts. Critics of 
the I. and R. system were quick to 
jump to the conclusion that this experi- 
ence had discredited that system so 
badly that it would lose popular sup- 
port. 



98 



Equity 



But friends of the I. and R. were well 
aware that the instances of frauds in 
the signing of petitions had occurred in 
connection with attempts to refer the 
Warnes and Kilpatrick tax laws and 
the Green compulsory workmen's com- 
pensation law, all of which were fought 
by the special-privilege interests of the 
state. It was understood that the in- 
terests were trying to bring discredit 
upon the I. and R. system by those meth- 
ods; hence all who had faith in the 
people's rule saw only the necessity of 
finding proper remedies and safeguards 
to insure the just operation of the laws. 

Governor Cox, giving expression to 
this view and without waiting for the 
meeting of the next regular session of 
the legislature, included this problem in 
the legislative program which he sub- 
mitted to the extraordinary session of 
the legislature which met January 19th. 
This was the first extra session under 
the new state constitution giving to the 
Governor the new power to limit legis- 
lation to the subjects suggested by him- 
self. 

Legislation was therefore enacted 
(Substitute Senate Bill No. 6 and House 
Bill No. 9) at this session to protect the 
circulation of Initiative and Referendum 
petitions. The whole I. and R. ma- 
chinery is placed under the provisions of 
the Corrupt Practices act, which makes 
any person liable to criminal prosecu- 
tion who willfully misrepresents the con- 
tents of Initiative and Referendum peti- 
tions, or who tries to bribe electors into 
signing petitions, or who alters any 
petition. Further, the new legislation 
makes duplicate signing, false signature 
or illegal signing of a petition a crime 
punishable by a fine not to exceed $100. 
It provides that the stealing or mu- 
tilation of petitions shall be considered 
a felony punishable by $500 fine and a 
five-year prison sentence. Falsehood 
concerning petitions is made perjury 
with a penalty of imprisonment from 
one to ten years. It makes it illegal 



for employers or others to influence 
voters to sign petitions by means of 
threats or intimidation. It gives to the 
Secretary of State full power to de- 
termine the genuineness of petitions and 
to conduct hearings in case of fraud. 
It requires that circulators of petitions 
must, within twenty days after filing of 
petitions with the Secretary of State, 
also file sworn statements showing in 
detail the time spent and money earned 
in connection with this work. This last 
safeguard is the answer of the law- 
makers to those critics who advocated 
the prohibition of payment of solicitors 
of petitions. It was seen at once by 
friends of the I. and R. that any such 
prohibition in the operation of a state- 
wide Referendum would necessarily 
hamper the work of initiating or re- 
ferring laws. The emergency clause, 
which would have made this law imme- 
diately operative, failed to receive the 
required two-thirds majority, leaving it 
subject to a vote of the people if enough 
voters can be found to invoke a Refer- 
endum. Nine measures adopted at this 
session were put under the emergency 
clause. 

The question of the use, or the pos- 
sible abuse, of the emergency clause of 
the I. and R. law has come to the sur- 
face recently in the city of Cleveland, 
where the city council repeatedly passed 
measures and removed them from the 
possibility of popular Referendum by the 
simple process of declaring them to be 
"emergency measures." Such ordinances 
become executive as soon as signed by 
the mayor, and therefore do not have 
to be held up for the period of forty 
days to allow for a possible Refer- 
endum. The Cleveland charter defines 
an emergency measure as "an ordinance 
or resolution for the immediate preser- 
vation of public peace, property, health 
or safety, or providing for the usual 
daily operation of a municipal depart- 
ment." 

It is the latter part of this provision 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall 



99 



that offers a loop-hole through which 
the council seeks to escape the Refer- 
endum feature of the city's charter. The 
most insignificant measures have thus 
passed as "emergencies" by this law- 
defying body of lawmakers. The Civic 
League of Cleveland is keeping tab on 
such measures with a view to testing 
their validity in the courts. 

Since January 1st the city of Dayton 
has been governed under the new city 
manager plan, with Henry M. Waite, 
formerly a public service director of 
Cincinnati, as the manager, at a salary 
of $12,500 a year. The Dayton plan 
differs from the commission govern- 
ment systems in that the Dayton com- 
missioners are not charged with any par- 
ticular department of a public service 
and have none of the powers of execu- 
tives, all of which powers are given to 
the city manager. The latter appoints 
all heads of departments with the ap- 
proval of the commissioners, and those 
heads are accountable only to the man- 
ager, who has power of removal with- 
out notice. The manager himself may 
be removed by the commissioners, and 
as a further safeguard, the right to re- 
call all officials is reserved to the peo- 
ple. The new government is based on 
the principle of fixed responsibility as 
an impetus to efficiency. A civil service 
commission is provided to keep the ap- 
pointing power in the right way, and 
this commission is non-partisan in its 
composition. 

Oregon. 

It is news of particular interest to all 
friends of the Initiative and Referendum 
movement that the man who, more than 
any other person, had to do with the 
establishment of that system of popular 
rule in Oregon, which has made that 
state famous, William S. U'Ren, often 
referred to as the father of the move- 
ment, has announced himself as an in- 
dependent candidate for governor of 
Oregon. In his announcement Mr. 
U'Ren says that although for years he 



has been a Republican, he has decided 
to seek the nomination as an independent 
candidate for the following reasons: 

(1) The measures necessary to complete 
what is called the Oregon System are essentially 
people's measures rather than the property of 
any political party, many of them opposed to 
the Republican party. These measures provide 
for conduct of the government by officials who 
are directly responsible to all the people, in- 
stead of to a party organization for their first 
allegiance. 

(2) All the standpatters and reactionaries 
who made vip the anti-Statement No. one and 
assembly crowd in 1910, and who, as they 
boasted in 1909 in the Oregonian, would "put 
the knife into each and all who declare for 
Statement one," are as anxious now as ever to 
put that same knife into me. They are as 
bitterly opposed now as they were in 1910 to 
the actual use of the initiative and refer- 
endum, to the corrupt practices act, to the 
recall, and to all the people's power measures, 
at which they will sneer as "Urenism" and the 
"Urenic" theory of government. 

(3) I would rather have those gentlemen 
fighting me from the front as open enemies 
because of the measures I stand for, than 
knifing me from my own ranks, as they have 
done for many years past with all Republican 
candidates who were known to be progressive. 

In connection with his platform, Mr. 
U'Ren favors the construction of roads 
with money obtained from a graduated 
inheritance tax, thus giving employ- 
ment to all citizens applying for it. He 
further advocates the short ballot, free 
school books and exemption of $1,500 
worth of personal property for land 
improvements for each taxpayer. 

Chief among the several measures 
being initiated in Oregon this year, from 
the standpoint of general interest, is one 
proposing to abolish the state senate. 
Another of almost equal public interest 
proposes the application of the system 
of proportional representation in the 
lower house of the legislature. These 
measures, which are backed by such in- 
fluential organizations as the State 
Grange, Federation of Labor, People's 
Power League, Farmers' Union, and the 
Farmers' Society of Equity, will come 
before the voters at the next general 
election in November of this year. 



100 



Vermont. 



The people of the Green Mountain 
State have leaped into the front rank 
of progress in the line of electoral re- 
form as the result of a Referendum 
election held March 3d. On that day- 
two questions were submitted to the 
voters of Vermont by a resolution of 
the legislature, one as to whether or 
not they favored a preferential primary 
system "whereby the voters may instruct 
their delegates to political conferences 
as to their preference for candidates for 
office"; the other as to whether or not 
they wish to have "a direct primary law 
whereby the voters are to vote directly 
for the candidates rather than the pres- 
ent system of nominating candidates for 
state, congressional and county offices." 

The result of this special Referendum 
election on these questions was as fol- 
lows: Preferential primary — Yes, 9,588; 
No, 7,439. Direct primary— Yes, 16,469; 
No, 6,000. 

National Committeeman C. H. Thomp- 
son, of the Progressive Party, said : 
"This triumph is a smashing blow at 
reactionary sentiment in Vermont." 

Virginia. 

Opportunity again has knocked at the 
door of the Old Dominion in vain. The 
legislature which met on January 14th 
had before it several amendments to 
the constitution providing for the Initi- 
ative and Referendum, some of them 
carefully drawn, but none was enacted. 
One of these, introduced by Represent- 
ative Harrison, passed the house by a 
vote of 64 to 24, but was not taken up 
in the senate. Nevertheless on another 
day, not far distant, according to all 
accounts, the people of Virginia will 
welcome this opportunity to control the 
public affairs of their state and so make 
their legislature more truly representa- 
tive. 

The legislature did enact a general 
city charter optional law, through which 
cities of the state are offered their choice 



Equity 

of several modern forms of city govern- 
ment, including the commission form and 
the city-manager form. In none of these, 
however, is provision made for the Initi- 
ative and Referendum or the Recall. 
Proponents of this measure objected to 
introducing the I., R. and R. into it for 
fear that it would jeopardize the pas- 
sage of the act. In a separate bill the 
I., R. and R. were introduced, and this 
was reported favorably, but did not come 
to a vote. 

Nevertheless it is regarded as a sign 
of progress that in the city charter act 
the right of the Initiative is recognized 
by allowing a certain percentage of the 
voters of any city to demand an elec- 
tion to decide the question of adopting 
the form of city charter to be asked 
for. The more reactionary senate in- 
sisted on making the percentage of 
voters to start such a petition 25%, 
which is, of course, far too high. Most 
of the members of that body were 
elected three years ago, and it is only 
fair to note that a good deal of water 
has flown under the bridge on this ques- 
tion during that time in Virginia. It is 
reasonable to expect that the senate 
elected in 1915 will reflect some of the 
progressive sentiment which already has 
begun to crystallize strongly within 
the dominant Democratic Party of the 
state. 

On February 28th the crystallization 
process took shape in a state conven- 
tion of prominent Democrats at Rich- 
mond, which organized the Virginia 
Progressive Democratic League, of 
which Attorney-General John Garland 
Pollard was elected president. Ad- 
dresses were made to this convention 
by Secretary of State Bryan, Senator 
Owen, of Oklahoma, and other promi- 
nent Democrats. A platform was 
adopted favoring the Initiative and 
Referendum and several other progres- 
sive measures. Delegates to this con- 
vention criticised the managers of the 
regular Democratic machine for its fail- 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall 



101 



ure to secure the enactment of progres- 
sive legislation. A vigorous state- 
wide campaign was thus begun which 
is expected to revolutionize the policy 
of the Democratic Party in the state. 

A bill providing for an election on 
the question of state-wide prohibition 
was enacted at the recent session of the 
legislature, being passed by a large ma- 
jority in the house and a tie vote in 
the senate, the presiding officer casting 
the decisive vote for the measure. 

Washington. 

The city of Seattle has again been 
in the limelight of public discussion 
throughout the country owing to the 
outcome of its regular mayoralty elec- 
tion held on March 3d. The feature of 
that election which has caused so much 
comment was the fact that it placed in 
the mayor's chair the same man who 
had been deposed from that office in 
1911 by the use of the popular Recall; 
namely, Hiram C. Gill. Critics of the 
Recall idea were quick to see in this 
what they regarded as an instance of 
its failure or futility. They argued that 
it showed how the temporary whims of 
the people or the popular passions of 
the moment might find an outlet to the 
disadvantage of the community as a 
whole. One paper, the Biddeford (Me.) 
Journal, says of this incident: "It is 
illuminating because it shows how the 
recall works in practice as an expres- 
sion of passing fancy." 

Now the facts of the matter are sub- 
stantially these: Mayor Gill, after hav- 
ing served in office about a year, was 
recalled as a result of indignation on 
the part of the reform element, includ- 
ing the women voters of the city, against 
the "wide-open" attitude of his admin- 
istration as to saloons and other places 
of amusement. C. G. Morrison, execu- 
tive secretary of the Municipal League 
of Seattle, in a recent letter to Equity, 
says that all persons interested in bet- 
ter civic government still believe that 



the recall of Gill was justified, and that 
conditions under his administration were 
intolerable. Mr. Morrison says further 
that it was undoubtedly the intention 
of those forces to put into the mayor's 
office this year a man capable of giving 
a business administration. They had 
such a man in view in the candidacy 
of Mr. Trenholme, and there were one 
or two others in that class. But dur- 
ing the campaign it appears that Mr. 
Gill was able to convince a large number 
of his critics and his enemies that he 
had seriously reformed on the issue of 
a "wide-open" town, and was ready to 
ally himself with the reform forces. 
At the same time it became known that 
the brewing concerns and other large 
corporate interests were contributing to 
the campaign of Trenholme and other 
candidates. This caused a great many 
people to throw their support to Gill. 

In the light of these facts it becomes 
apparent that instead of expressing 
"gusty passions of the mob," this re- 
election of Mayor Gill represents the 
deliberate conviction of a large majority 
of the voters that he should be given 
another trial as chief executive of the 
city. 

The factor here that attracted attention 
was simply this : Mayor Gill was re- 
called from the mayoralty in 1911. Now 
he is elected again at a regular election. 
Many a man has been defeated for office 
and afterward elected to the same office. 
William McKinley was defeated for 
Congress after he had filled the office 
a number of terms, and afterward 
elected again. That is, he was recalled 
at a regular election and then two years 
afterward re-elected. Grover Cleveland 
was elected President in 1884, defeated 
(recalled) in 1888, and elected again in 
1892. This has occurred many times in 
all parts of the country. So Mayor 
Gill's experience is not at all unusual, 
except that he was recalled before the 
end of his term instead of at the end 
of the term; then, after an interval, 



102 

he was elected again to the same office 
at a regular election. 

In addition to the submission of a 
state-wide prohibition law at the No- 
vember election under the Initiative, 
petitions have been circulated for other 
measures, the number and character of 
which will be noted at a later date. 



The Referendum in Ulster. 

Premier Asquith proposed a very rea- 
sonable method of settlement for the 
troubled Irish question as follows: 

1. The counties of Ulster province will be 
allowed to say whether or not they desire to 
be excluded from the operations of the Home 
Rule for Ireland bill. 

2. A poll will be taken of the parliamentary 
electors on the question of exclusion before 
the Home Rule bill becomes operative. 

3. If a majority favors exclusion, the county 
or counties wherein there has been such a 
decision will be automatically excluded for a 
period of six years from the time of the first 
meeting of the _ new Parliament. 

4. If a majority of the Ulster counties favor 
exclusion, only the assent of a majority of the 
people of the whole United Kingdom can bring 
them under sovereignty of the proposed Dublin 
parliament. 

This did not please the extremists 
on either side, as no fair proposition 
does. It seems eminently fair to use 
the county unit, this being real Home 
Rule, as the smaller the unit the more 
the "Home" is accentuated. There are 
nine counties in the province of Ulster. 
If the Referendum were submitted to 
the entire province as a unit, it would 
doubtless decide against Irish Home 
Rule, although five counties are known 
to be for it. The county unit would 
give every county in Ulster the option 
of coming under the Home Rule act or 
not. We suppose that the reason that 
the Referendum is not offered to other 
provinces, nor to the counties in other 
provinces, is that it is universally as- 
sumed that they favor Irish Home Rule, 
so the test is not necessary. 

Since the above suggestion the Gov- 
ernment has suggested the federation of 
the whole United Kingdom on a home- 
rule basis as a solution of the Irish prob- 
lem. 



Equity 

Progress is Favored by Larger Powers 
to the Intelligent Electorate. 

In a series of long and learned articles 
on "progressiveism," the I., R. and R., 
etc., by Theodore W. Noyes, in the 
Washington (D. C.) Star, he argues 
that as New Zealand made her progress 
without the Initiative, Recall and the full 
Referendum, these devices are not nec- 
essary to achieve progress. Mr. Noyes 
does not realize that there are different 
forms of democracy. The English sys- 
tem of government, practised in New 
Zealand, is much more democratic, and 
produces more democratic results, than 
ours. The failure of a government bill 
in parliament precipitates a Referendum 
to the people on that question. Our 
lawmakers are elected for a definite 
term, and nothing that they can do dur- 
ing that term will precipitate a Refer- 
endum. 

The question with us has been, how 
best to get more democracy into our 
form of government. To adopt the Eng- 
lish system would be to change our 
plans completely, beginning with the 
National government. This would be a 
task so stupendous that it has never 
been seriously considered. It has been 
found infinitely easier and less disturb- 
ing to get more democracy in our sys- 
tem of government by expanding the 
application of the New England town 
meeting principle, applying it to larger 
and larger electorates by means of im- 
proved methods; or, which is substan- 
tially the same thing, by adopting the 
Swiss method of democracy instead of 
the English, as being more in harmony 
with our established institutions. It is 
natural that- we could borrow methods 
more easily from a sister republic than 
from a monarchy. New Zealand has 
found the English system workable for 
achieving progress. Switzerland and 
many of our cities and states have found 
and are finding that the Initiative, Refer- 
endum and Recall are efficient instru- 
ments for achieving progress. 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall 



Mr. Noyes is distressed by the pres- 
ence of "General Apathy." He says: 

Every thoughtful discussion of the value 
and limitations of the initiative, referendum 
and recall leads up to the conclusion that the 
primary and vital fault of our political system 
is with the non-voting public. The neglect of 
civic obligations, the failure or refusal to 
exercise the privilege or duty of voting at the 
primaries and elections is the notable evil of 
the time. The vital need is (i) to make of 
the voters wiser and better voters, and (2) to 
make the wise and good voters vote. 

He presents the following interesting 

figures : 

In the calculations before the recent presi- 
dential election, based on the 1908 percentage 
of voters to population, and on the census 
office estimates of increases in population, it 
was figured that 17,000,000 votes would be cast. 
In 1908 the votes cast numbered 14,888,442. 
Between that time and 1912 suffrage had been 
given to 890,000 women in California and 
Washington, 170,000 males of voting age had 
been admitted to statehood in New Mexico and 
Arizona, and over two millions of voters had 
been added to the lists of the country at large. 
Allowing for the usual shrinkages a total esti- 
mate of seventeen million votes was made for 
1912. Instead of seventeen millions a total 
vote of 15,020,703 was cast in 1912, an in- 
crease of only 132,261 over 1908, a smaller 
increase than the new woman voters in Cali- 
fornia and Washington and the male voters 
in the new states of Arizona and New Mexico, 
who were non-existent in 1908. Thus there 
were at least two million more stay-at-home 
voters in 19 12 than in 1908. In the most 
important states of the Union, tho population 
largely increased, votes decreased. 



According to census office estimates there 
were last year 29,500,000 men (and women in 
woman suffrage states) of voting age. About 
11% of these are to be deducted for failure 
to receive the proper naturalization papers. 
Then tens and hundreds of thousands are 
barred because they are lunatics, idiots, paupers 
or criminals; or because they live in the Dis- 
trict of Columbia; or because they are negroes 
and live in the South; or because they cannot 
meet the educational tests required in many 
states; or because they are Indians, Mongolians 
or have failed to pay their poll tax, or have 
failed or have been unable to register as voters. 

After making liberal allowances for all thesr 
disqualifications there remained, it is esti 
mated, about 22,000,000 fully qualified voters 
in the United States in 191 2. It was predicted 
on the precedents of past abstentions that 
about 5,000,000 of this number would deliber- 
ately absent themselves from the polls; in fact 
•nearly 7,000,000 voluntarily stayed away. 

More voters voted for no one than voted 
for Wilson and elected him President. The 
political army of General Apathy was 75% 
larger than the army of Colonel Roosevelt. 
General Apathy — representing and inspiring the 
stay-at-home voters — has generally run third in 
the Presidential race, but last year, as we have 
seen, he held nearly 2,000,000 more voters 
than had been expected, and with a total 
approximating 7,000,000 placed himself at the 
very head of the poll. 

He also notes the fact that fewer 
voters vote on measures than vote for 



103 



candidates, and he erroneously estimates 
this defection to be about 50%. The de- 
fection is about 25% of the voters who 
vote, and we have always considered this 
defection an advantage, for it measures, 
and automatically excludes, the ignorant 
and indifferent — it gives the decision of 
measures to the intelligent voters who 
are interested in public affairs. 

We do not share Mr. Noyes' distress 
over the large number of non-voters. If 
they are too ignorant to understand the 
issues, or too indifferent to go to the 
polls, the fact that they do not vote is 
a blessing. We want this country gov- 
erned by the intelligent voters who 
appreciate the franchise and who delight 
to exercise it, whether they be few or 
many. What we desire is quality rather 
than quantity. Those who are too igno- 
rant or too indifferent to vote have no 
reason to complain of our government. 
But those who do vote for candidates, and 
who are misled by the pre-election prom- 
ises of the candidates, have much reason 
to complain of the absence of any power 
to control legislation or legislators; and 
hence the widespread demand for the 
Initiative and Referendum to control 
legislation, and the Recall to control 
public officers. 

In Mr. Noyes' study of ballot prob- 
lems, he has missed a very important 
thing, which may be a cause of much of 
the defection of which he complains; 
and that is, our methods frequently re- 
sult in the election of minority candi- 
dates. If plural choices could be indi- 
cated on the ballot so that if the voter's 
first choice is not effective his second 
or third choice may be effective, perhaps 
a greater number of voters would vote. 
Certainly a truer choice of the electorate 
would result. If, in the last presidential 
election, second and third choices could 
have been expressed on the ballots and 
counted according to well-known rules, 
the result may have elected Mr. Wilson 
and it may not; but it would cer- 
tainly have placed in the White House 



104 



Equity 



the real choice of the people. And if 
the electorate were reflected truly in 
Congress, there would now be several 
prohibitionists and about twenty social- 
ists in the House, whereas there has 
never been a prohibitionist elected to 
that body, and the only socialist member 
was defeated, tho the socialist vote of 
the country was vastly increased. 

Mr. Noyes, we hope you will, here- 
after, advocate a truer system of repre- 
sentation, and larger power to the por- 
tion of the electorate which does care 
to exercise the high privilege and per- 
form the responsible and important duty 
of voting. 



Italy Unified by the Referendum. 

Is it generally known to what extent 
the Referendum aided in the unification 
of modern Italy? 

June 8, 1848, a plebescite (Refer- 
endum) was taken in Lombardy on the 
question of annexation to Piedmont, 
which was carried by a vote of 561,002 
to 681 ; though, owing to outside influ- 
ences, such annexation was not realized 
till some years after. 

During March, 1860, a Referendum 
was taken in Tuscany, Modena, Parma 
and the Romagna on the choice of in- 
dependence or annexation to Piedmont, 
with the aggregate result of 792,577 
affirmative votes out of a total of 
807,502. 

By a plebescite October 21, 1860, the 
people of Sicily and Naples declared, by 
a vote of 1,734,117 to 10,979, for annex- 
ation to Piedmont. 

About the same time Umbria, by a 
vote of 97,040 to 380, and the Marches, 
by a vote of 133,077 to 1,212, declared 
for annexation to Piedmont. 

Venetia, October 21, 22, 1866, voted 
647,246 to 47 in favor of annexation. 

In 1871, Rome declared in favor of 
annexation by a vote of 133,681 to 1,507. 

These figures are taken from King's 
"History of Italian Unity," vol. II, 



chap. 27, by F. A. Ogg, and appear in 
his "Governments of Europe," pages 
363-4. And on page 366 Mr. Ogg 
says, concerning measures considered by 
parliament for the purpose of modify- 
ing the law: "Care has been exercised 
that such enactments shall be in harmony 
with the public will, and in practise they 
are rarely brought to a final vote until 
the country shall have been given an 
opportunity to pass upon them at a 
general election." 

So it seems that Italy has practised 
for half a century a riliance on the popu- 
lar will concerning measures, that we 
have never practised in national mat- 
ters, and that we are only beginning in 
state and city matters. 



Judges for Life. 
American lawyers who attended the 
Bar Association meeting at Montreal 
found themselves in a land where judges 
are appointed for life and everybody is 
satisfied. Ex-President Taft spoke for 
the life-tenure system for the United 
States. This is Taft's legitimate atti- 
tude; for it is the antipodes to the re- 
call either of judges or their decisions. 
Yet no well-read lawyer in Canada or 
from the United States could have been 
unaware of the fact that makes impos- 
sible here the system which works so 
well in Canada and Great Britain. Their 
judges have no power over legislation. 
They do not pass on the constitutionality 
of laws. They do not, as our judges do, 
govern their country. British and British- 
Imperial Parliaments are supreme. They 
may pass any sort of law they please, 
and the courts must accept the law as 
passed. Their courts have no political 
power. Our courts possess the power 
of saying the last word in government. 
Their judges may well be appointed for 
life; and if ours were merely arbiters 
of controversies between individuals we 
might safely follow the same system. 
But as long as our courts sit above the 
legislatures and executives elected by 



Proportional Representation Review 105 

the people, to the extent that they are ex-President Taft desires the adoption 

independent of the popular will, they and extension of the excellent British 

constitute an irresponsible, even tho system here, let him advocate it as a 

learned and respectable, oligarchy. If whole— Collier's Weekly. 



PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION REVIEW. 

Official Organ of the American Proportional Representation League 

Edited by C. G. Hoag, General Secretary of the League, Haverford, Pa. (June 10th till 
October 1st, Tamworth, N. H.) 

Officers of the League: President, William Dudley Foulke. Vice-Presidents, Prof. 
John R. Commons, William S. U'Ren, Mrs. Louis F. Post. General Secretary-Treasurer, C. G. 
Hoag, Haverford, Pa. (June 10th till October 1st, Tamworth, N. H.)'. Secretary-Treasurer for 
Canada, Robert Tyson, 20 Harbord Street, Toronto. 

The object of the League is to secure the adoption of proportional representation for the 
election of state legislatures, city councils, and other deliberative or policy-determining bodies. 
The means advocated is some form of effective ballot suitable for such a purpose, that is, a 
ballot that permits the voter to record his real will in respect to the composition of the deliber- 
ative body without fear of that will's being nullified by any arbitrary system of district lines, 
primary elections, or what not. Of the many plans of proportional representation, tried or 
suggested, the League supports no one exclusively. It favors each in accordance with its 
practicability for the special application under consideration and with the degree to which it 
is effective in insuring to each voter's will, in respect to the composition of the deliberative 
body in question, neither more nor less than its just weight. 

The secretaries will be glad to advise correspondents in regard to the application of the 
general principle of effective voting to the election of any specified deliberative body. 

All persons in sympathy with the object of the League are invited to become members. 
Annual dues, $i.oo. Larger subscriptions are needed. 



Notes. 

Since the Review for January went to 
press the League has issued two pam- 
phlets, No. 4 and No. 5, and the United 
States Senate has issued, as "Senate 
Document No. 359 (63d Congress, Sec- 
ond Session)" a comprehensive pamphlet 
entitled "Effective Voting" and covering 
both preferential majority voting and 
proportional representation. The Senate 
document was written by the general sec- 
retary of the League at the request of 
Senator Owen of Oklahoma. 

The League's Pamphlet No. 4 is the 
general secretary's address on "Propor- 
tional Representation, Preferential Vot- 
ing, and Direct Primaries" before the 
Toronto Convention of the National 
Municipal League, reprinted from the 
January issue of the National Municipal 
Review. 

Pamphlet No. 5 contains matter sup- 
plementary to pamphlets 1, 2, 3, and 4, 
and also an article entitled "Testimony 
from Abroad" containing the opinions of 
leading European statesmen of various 
parties in regard to the working of pro- 



portional representation in the several 
countries where it has been adopted. 

The Senate document is more compre- 
hensive than any one of the pamphlets 
issued by the League. It will be mailed 
without charge to any address on appli- 
cation to C. G. Hoag, Haverford, Pa. 

Pamphlets No. 4 and No. 5 are for 
sale at the following prices. No. 4, per 
copy, postpaid, 4c; per dozen to one 
address, postpaid, 30c. No. 5, per copy, 
postpaid, 3c; per dozen to one address, 
postpaid, 25c 



Supporters of proportional representa- 
tion in Oregon are said to be planning 
another campaign, through the Initiative, 
for the application of P. R. to the 
election of the Oregon legislature. 



Proportionalists in Seattle are work- 
ing vigorously for the application of 
P. R. to the election of the council under 
the proposed new charter that is now 
being drawn up for that city. Similar 
movements are on in several other cities. 



106 



Equity 



The Organization of the League. 

The proposed new constitution sub- 
mitted to a vote of the League in De- 
cember last was ratified by an almost 
unanimous vote of the members. It is 
printed in full below, with the retention 
in Article IV of only those candidates 
for the Council who have since accepted 
the office. No answers have yet been re- 
ceived from the eminent proportionalists 
who have been invited by the secretaries 
to serve as honorary vice-presidents. 

Although the response to the Decem- 
ber appeal for subscriptions (in addi- 
tion to membership dues) was very grati- 
fying, the subscriptions and dues re- 
ceived since October 1st amounting to 
nearly $1,200, nevertheless the treas- 
ury is low again on account of the 
League's increased activities. Whereas 
half of the time of a stenographer suf- 
ficed fairly well last year, this year all 
the time of a stenographer is barely 
enough; and other expenses, of course, 
have increased correspondingly. To fin- 
ish out the fiscal year till October 1st, 
therefore, about $700 more must be col- 
lected. Non-members of the League who 
realize the importance of its work are 
urged to join, and to help as much as 
they can, now when their help is most 
needed. 

True representation of the people in 
their city councils, their state legisla- 
tures, their House of Representatives, 
and all their other representative bodies 
is the means by which other needed re- 
forms can be got most wisely, most con- 
sistently, and with the least social dis- 
turbance. You do not want to be in the 
position of the officer who, turning up 
after the great battle was over, congratu- 
lated Henry of Navarre on his victory. 
"Yes," replied the King, "it was a glori- 
ous fight, but you were not there" 

The general secretary will be glad to 
send a pamphlet and an invitation to join 
to any address sent to him by a member. 



Constitution of the American Propor- 
tional Representation League. 

ARTICLE I. This society shall be known 
as The American Proportional Representation 
League. 

ARTICLE II. Its object shall be to secure 
the adoption of proportional representation for 
state legislatures, city councils, and other 
deliberative or policy-determining bodies. The 
plan of proportional representation to be 
recommended by either of the League's secre- 
taries in any particular case shall be that 
which seems to him most suitable for the case, 
provided always that it embodies the principle 
of a single vote in a multiple-membered dis- 
trict. 

ARTICLE III. Any person in the United 
States or Canada who contributes one dollar 
or more towards carrying out the object of 
the League shall thereby become an active 
member for the fiscal year of the League, 
which shall be from October 1st till Oc- 
tober 1st. 

Any person, in any country, who has done 
or is doing much for the cause of pro- 
portional representation may be entered by 
the secretaries on the rolls of the League as 
an honorary member. 

Active members shall receive, without charge 
above their annual dues, such publications 
of the League as may be issued by the secre- 
taries for general circulation. Honorary 
members shall receive such of the League's 
publications as the secretaries think it best, 
in the interest of the cause throughout the 
world, to send them. 

ARTICLE IV. The officers of the League 
shall be a council of not over fifty members, 
a president, three vice-presidents, not over 
five honorary vice-presidents, a general secre- 
tary-treasurer, and a secretary-treasurer for 
Canada. After October 1st, 1914, the council 
shall be elected biennially at large by the 
Hare system, the ballots being cast by mail 
and the candidates being members who may 
be suggested as such by either secretary or 
by any member. Until that date the council 
shall consist of the following members: 

Charles Francis Adams, Massachusetts 

Charles Frederick Adams, New York 

Felix Adler, New York 

Dr. J. F. Baldwin, Ohio 

W. E. Boynton, Ohio 

Richard S. Childs, New York 

Stoughton Cooley, Illinois 

Alfred D. Cridge, Oregon 

Horace E. Deming, New York 

Rev. Charles F. Dole, Massachusetts 

George H. Duncan, New Hampshire 

John E. Eastmond, New York 

John H. Gabriel, Colorado 

Lucius F. C. Garvin, Rhode Island 

William H. Gove, Massachusetts 

Jane E. Harnett, California 

Paxton Hibben, Indiana 

William Hoag, Massachusetts 

Jeremiah W. Jenks, New York 

Daniel Kiefer, Ohio 

Charles McCarthy, Wisconsin 

Robert L. Owen, Oklahoma 

Robert Treat Paine, Massachusetts 

Eltweed Pomeroy, Texas 

Jackson H. Ralston, Washington, D. C. 

Daniel S. Remsen, New York 

Linton Satterthwaite, New Jersey # 

J. Henry Scattergood, Pennsylvania 

J. S. Shapiro, New York 

Isaac Sharpless, Pennsylvania 

Lieut. C. P. Shaw, Virginia 

Moorfield Storey, Massachusetts 

Dr. C. F. Taylor, Pennsylvania 



Proportional Representation Review 



107 



Carl D. Thompson, Illinois 

DeLancey Verplanck, New York 

John M. Vincent, Maryland 

Thomas Raeburn White, Pennsylvania 

Charles Zeublin, Massachusetts 

After October 1st, 1914, the honorary vice- 
presidents shall be retained in office or replaced 
by others at the pleasure of the council. 
Until that date these officers shall be such 
distinguished advocates of proportional rep- 
resentation in any part of the world, not ex- 
ceeding five in number, as may accept invi- 
tations to fill the positions extended by the 
League's secretaries jointly. 

After October 1st, 1914, the president, vice- 
presidents, and secretary-treasurers shall be 
retained in office or replaced by others at 
the pleasure of the council. Until that date 
these officers shall be as follows: 

President, William Dudley Foulke. 

Vice-Presidents, John R. Commons, W. S. 
U'Ren, and Alice Thacher Post. 

General Secretary-Treasurer, C. G. Hoag, 
Haverford, Pa. 

Secretary-Treasurer for Canada, Robert 
Tyson, 20 Harbord St., Toronto, Can. 

ARTICLE V. The secretary-treasurers shall 
keep accurate accounts, open to the inspection 
of any member of the League. They shall 
receive no compensation for their services 
before October 1st, 1914, and none thereafter 
unless by vote of the council. 

ARTICLE VI. This constitution shall 
supersede the former constitution of the 
League when approved in writing by an abso- 
lute majority of the active members of the 
League. It may be amended by vote of an 
absolute majority of the active members who 
vote on the question after due notice of any 
proposed amendment has been sent to all such 
members. C. G. Hoag. 



Holland. 

Through the kindness of the adjunct 
secretary of the Commisssion on pro- 
portional representation recently ap- 
pointed in Holland we can give a literal 
translation of parts of the "Royal De- 
cree" by which the Commission was in- 
stituted. From the passages we quote 
it will be seen that Holland has virtually 
decided to introduce proportional repre- 
sentation, the only question remaining 
being as to the details of the provisions 
under which the system shall be applied. 

At the recommendation of our Min- 
ister of the Interior, dated November 
12th, 1913, ..." runs the decree, 
"have decided: 

(1) To institute a State-Commission 
fpr the purpose of examining the ques- 
tion what system of proportionate 
franchise [proportional representa- 
tion] is most desirable for our repre- 
sentative bodies; 

(2) to charge that Commission with 
embodying such system in one or more 
bills, accompanied by the requisite 
explanatory comment. 



British Columbia. 

Some years ago the Hon. Earl Grey, 
then Governor-General of Canada, vis- 
ited Nelson, British Columbia, and ad- 
dressed the Canadian Club there on the 
subject of "Proportional Representa- 
tion." Many were impressed, but noth- 
ing was done until the Nelson Liberal 
Association took up the matter about 
two years ago. After much investi- 
gation and discussion that association 
passed a unanimous resolution endors- 
ing the system and recommending its 
adoption by the Liberal Party of British 
Columbia. 

The Nelson delegates to the annual 
Liberal Convention held in Revelstoke, 
May, 1913, brought the matter to the 
attention of that body. A committee, 
of which Dr. N. Wolverton of Nelson 
was chairman, was appointed "to inves- 
tigate Proportional Representation, the 
Initiative, the Referendum, and the Re- 
call, and report at the next meeting of 
the convention." 

During the year the committee con- 
ducted an extensive correspondence and 
gathered data from all parts of the 
world where any of the systems were 
in operation or systematically urged. 
Several meetings of the committee were 
held during the year to digest the ma- 
terial gathered and to formulate a 
report. 

At the annual Liberal Convention held 
in Victoria February 25-27, 1914, an 
exhaustive report was presented. It 
showed the anomalies and absurdities of 
our present system of electing repre- 
sentatives by a majority or plurality in 
single-member constituencies, briefly out- 
lined the principle of proportional rep- 
resentation, and recommended the adop- 
tion of the principle by the Liberal Party 
in British Columbia and its insertion as 
a plank in the party platform. 

This part of the report was earnestly 
discussed for about four hours by the 
450 delegates present. The utter fail- 
ure of our present methods to secure 



108 Equity 

fair representation or true democratic 
government was recognized by prac- 
tically every speaker. That the system 
of proportional representation was fair 
and just, and the only system whereby 
effective representation could be given 
to minorities, was almost as generally 
admitted. The effective opposition 
might be fully summed up in the 
phrases : "a new and unknown scheme" ; 
"the people are not demanding it"; "it 
is too complicated"; "impracticable." 

However, abundant evidence of its 
smooth and easy working in many lands, 
together with clear statements of its 
many great advantages, won its way ; and 
when the final vote was taken, the report 
was adopted by about four to one, and 
the principle of proportional repre- 
sentation became a plank in the plat- 
form of the Liberal Party of British 
Columbia. 

As much time had been consumed in 
the discussion of the first part of the 
report, and the expected time of the 
final adjournment of the Convention had 
passed, the chairman of the committee 
moved the postponement of the con- 
sideration of the remainder of the re- 
port until next year's meeting of the 
convention. 



The Movement in France. 
Written for the P. R. Review by 
Georges Lachapelle, General Sec- 
retary of the Republican P. R. 
Committee of France, 
translated by c g. hoag. 
In July, 1912, the Chamber of Depu- 
ties passed a compromise electoral re- 
form bill, the object of which was to 
elect the deputies in multi-membered dis- 
tricts with minority representation. This 
bill was very much like P. R., but it 
gave a premium, namely one additional 
seat, to a list that secured an absolute 
majority of the votes of the district. 

In March, 1913, the Senate rejected 
this bill of the Chamber of Deputies, 
and the ministry of M. Aristide Briand, 
which supported it, resigned. A little 



later, in June, 1913, the Senate passed 
a bill providing that the deputies should 
be elected by the block vote* in multi- 
member districts instead of being elected 
in single-member districts. 

But the Chamber of Deputies per- 
sisted. In November, 1913, it passed, 
by a majority of a hundred and twenty, 
another compromise bill designed to 
carry out an understanding between the 
partisans of the majority system and 
those of the proportional system. 

Under this new system each list of 
candidates would get as many seats [of 
those assigned to the multi-member dis- 
trict] as it got quotas of votes, the 
quota being the quotient found by di- 
viding the whole number of votes cast 
in the district by the number of depu- 
ties to be elected [in it]. For example, 
if a list got 25,000 votes when there 
were five deputies to be elected and 
100,000 voters, that list would get one 
seat, because 100,000 divided by 5 equals 
20,000, and this 20,000, which is the 
quota, is contained once in 25,000. 

Not all the seats, however, could be 
assigned according to this rule. And if, 
for example, only three seats were as- 
signed by this rule out of five to be 
filled, two would be left over. For the 
assignment of these two seats, recourse 
was had to a second examination of 
the results of the voting, and the two 
seats were assigned to the [unelected] 
candidates having the most votes, as 
under the majority t system. 

To sum up, the new bill passed by 
the Chamber of Deputies had as its 
object the assignment of about two- 
thirds of the seats by the proportional 
system and the remaining third by the 
majority system. 

When this bill came before the Sen- 



*Under the block-vote system each elector 
votes for as many members as are to be elected 
in his (multi-member) district. This system, 
which is even worse than the single-member 
district system that is usual in the United 
States, is used for various purposes in the 
United States, notably for the election of 
the members of the Lower House of New 
Jersey for certain districts. — [Translator.] 

fin the sense of plurality. — [Translator.] 



Proportional Repr 

ate, that body rejected it as it had re- 
jected the former bill in March, 1913. 
The Senate proposed simply the block 
vote, which is even more unjust than 
the single-member district system. 

The general parliamentary elections 
will be held on Sunday, April 26, or on 
the following Sunday. It is therefore 
too late for the two Chambers to come 
to an agreement on a definite bill. The 
mode of election will not be changed 
before the general elections. But it is 
expected that before adjourning the 
Chamber of Deputies will make a pro- 
test against the Senate's position and 
that P. R. will figure in most of the 
political platforms [in connection with 
the April elections]. 

Moreover, the supporters of P. R. in- 
tend to take up again their campaign of 
propaganda. They will say to the voters 
that, having failed to get the Senate to 
pass the compromise bill, they hence- 
forth renounce all compromise, intend- 
ing from this time on to see to it that 
nothing less wins out than a P. R. sys- 
tem that is thorough-going, that is, a 
system that is really just to the four 
parties of the country, the Conservatives, 
the Moderate Republicans, the Radical 
Republicans, and the Socialists. 

It is well known that public opinion 
in France is divided into four main di- 
visions, which makes the maintenance 
of the majority system impossible. The 
motive behind the Senate's opposition is 
nothing but the self-interest of the mem- 
bers, who fear that as soon as P. R. has 
been applied to the election of the Depu- 
ties it will be applied to that of their 
own body. 

If, however, the Chamber of Deputies 
elected [in April] has a majority for 
proportional representation, the Senate 
will at last have to give in. 

There seems to be no doubt but that 
the country will declare again for P. R. 
Of the four parties in the country three 
are for P. R., the Conservatives, the 
Moderate Republicans, and the Social- 
ists. Only the Radical party is opposed, 



esentation Review 



109 



and of its members some of the most 
distinguished have already allied them- 
selves with the movement. 

P. R. will therefore win out in France 
after the general elections. 

Note by the translator. — This article 
was written before the assassination of 
M. Calmette. 



H. G. Wells on P. R. 
An article on "The Disease of Par- 
liaments" in the March Metropolitan 
Magazine, by H. G. Wells, the English 
novelist, is a plea for proportional rep- 
resentation and an explanation of the 
Hare system as carried out under the 
rules of the (English) Proportional Rep- 
resentation Society. We quote some 
striking passages from the article: 

The syndicalist movement, sabotage 
in France and Larkinism in Great 
Britain, are, from the point of view 
of social stability, the most sinister 
demonstrations of the gathering anger 
of the laboring classes with repre- 
sentative institutions. . . . 

But I would add that so far repre- 
sentative government has not had [in 
countries that have not adopted pro- 
portional representation] even the be- 
ginnings of a fair trial. So far we 
have not had representative govern- 
ment, but only a devastating carica- 
ture. ... 

It [proportional representation] is 
not a faddist proposal . . .; it is the 
carefully worked out right way to 
do something that hitherto we have 
been doing in the wrong way. It is 
no more an eccentricity than is proper 
baking in the place of baking amidst 
dirt and with unlimited adulteration, 
or the running of trains to their 
destinations instead of running them 
without notice into casually selected 
sidings and branch lines. It is not 
the substitution of something for 
something else of the same nature ; it 
is the substitution of right for wrong. 
It is the plain common-sense of the 
greatest difficulty in contemporary 
affairs. . . . 

The real leaders of the country will 
govern the country. . . . 

It would be a steadier, stabler, more 
confident, and more trusted govern- 
ment than the world has ever seen 
before. 



110 Equity 

THE SHORT BALLOT DEPARTMENT. 

Edited by H. S. Gilbertson, executive secretary of The National Short Ballot Organization 
3S3 Fourth Avenue, New York City. 
Officers of the Short Ballot Organization: President. Woodrow Wilson Vice- 
Presidents, Winston Churchill; Horace E. Deming; Ben B. Lindsev William S TT'Kfn" 
William Allen White; Clinton Rogers Woodruff; John Mitchell, Mt Vernon^ N * Y Advfsorv 
Board, Lawrence F. Abbott, Richard S. Childs Henry Jones Ford, Norman Hapgood, Woodrow 
Wilson. Secretary and Treasurer, Richard S. Childs. Executive Secretary, H. S. Gilbertson. 



The Short Ballot in New York State. 

The Short Ballot movement won a 
substantial victory in New York at the 
recent session of the legislature. The 
original measure, drawn by a committee 
of the New York Short Ballot Organ- 
ization and conforming with the ideas of 
Governor Hughes, Mr. Henry L. Stim- 
son and other prominent leaders in re- 
cent years, and providing for the ap- 
pointment of the principal state officials, 
passed the Assembly without change by 
a vote of 98 to 36. In the Senate it met 
with less success. Mr. Murtaugh, the 
majority leader, introduced the Assembly 
amendment with one change, i. e., that 
which retained the comptroller on the 
elective list. The Senate bill lay 
dormant in committee for many weeks 
and was finally reported out, amended so 
as to provide for the confirmation by 
the Senate of the governor's appoint- 
ments to the offices of secretary of state, 
state treasurer, attorney-general and 
state engineer and surveyor. This 
marked the extent of its progress in the 
upper house. The New York Short Bal- 
lot Organization strenuously opposed the 
confirmation feature, believing that it 
would continue the appointive officers 
above mentioned in the control of the 
unofficial party leaders and detract from 
the full measure of responsibility which 
should be exercised by the governor in 
selecting his subordinates. 

There the matter rests. There will 
be an extra session in June, which will 
be called upon to pass the appropriation 
bills. It is barely possible that the call 
for this session will include mention of 
the need for Short Ballot legislation, as 
this is considered one of the leading is- 
sues in the state at the present time, 
especially in view of the recent direct 
primary legislation which it is feared, 



without the Short Ballot, will tend to 
perpetuate at least some of the power 
of the party machines. 

The Optional Cities Bill. 
But the recent session, futile as it was 
in many respects, did one good piece of 
work in passing the optional cities bill. 
This is the measure which was drafted 
at the instance of the Municipal Govern- 
ment Association of New York State 
and which provides for seven simplified 
forms of city government, any one of 
which any city may adopt by local refer- 
endum. It is true that the bill now 
about to go before the Governor is far 
from the ideal sought for by its sponsors. 
No provision is made in it for non- 
partisan primaries and elections, or for 
the Initiative, Referendum and Recall. 
It was felt that the addition of these 
features would greatly reduce the 
chances of passage at this session and 
the policy of the Association was to 
accept half a loaf. Next year it is more 
than probable that bills will be intro- 
duced which will permit the adoption of 
these additional features. 

Buffalo's Successful Fight. 
No less important than the optional 
cities bill was the Buffalo city charter, 
which after a most romantic career is 
now almost certain to become the or- 
ganic law of the city. The fight for 
commission government began years ago 
under circumstances which offered so 
little immediate hope that it was impos- 
sible at first to secure a Buffalo mem- 
ber who would even introduce the char- 
ter in the legislature. Opposition has 
gradually broken down at home, and as 
years rolled on the legislature took a 
rather more friendly view toward the 
charter, insisting, however, right along, 
that they would not pass a bill providing 



The Short Ballot Department 



for the Initiative and the Recall. At 
this year's session the Buffalo charter 
in its amended form passed both houses 
by an almost unanimous vote. It then 
went to the mayor of the city, who was 
exceedingly hostile to it. He held the 
charter for many days, despite the pro- 
test of the people, and finally vetoed it. 
The bill then went back to the legisla- 
ture and was passed by both Senate and 
Assembly. So thoroughly in earnest 
were the people of Buffalo that when 
the measure was before the Senate for 
the second time, they held a mass meet- 
ing at home and kept in touch with the 
Senate proceedings during its progress 
by direct wire. It is undoubtedly the 
persistent spirit of the Buffalo leaders 
which is responsible for the final suc- 
cess of this movement. 

Another charter for a city of this state 
which is of considerable interest is that 
of Olean, N. Y. This is the straight 
city manager form with preferential 
voting, but without the Recall, the lat- 
ter feature having been stricken out by 
the Senate in accordance with its con- 
sistent policy. 



Ill 

Abolishment 



The Conferences on County Government. 

During the months of December, Janu- 
ary and February the County Committee 
of the New York Short Ballot Organi- 
zation held three public conferences for 
the purpose of bringing together men 
who were interested and versed in one 
or more phases of this neglected sub- 
ject. Among the speakers were the fol- 
lowing : 

Richard S. Childs : "Present Status of 
County Reform." 

Otho G. Cartwright : "What We Have 
Unearthed in Westchester." 

Robert S. Binkerd: "A Plan for City 
and County Consolidation in Greater 
New York." 

H. S. Gilbertson: "A Proposed Bill 
for Simplified Form of County Govern- 
ment." 

Winston Paul: "County Management 
in New Jersey." 

Bailey B. Burritt: "County Manage- 
ment of Charities and Special Institu- 
tions in our Own State." 



Joseph DuVivier: "The 
of the Coroner's Office." 

O. F. Lewis: "County Prisons." 

Lewis K. Rockefeller: "County Gov- 
ernment from the State Comptroller's 
Standpoint." 

The reports of these meetings were 
taken down stenographically, and on re- 
quest, the Secretary will be glad to send 
them to any one who is interested. 



The Coroner. 

One of the most interesting activities 
of the New York Short Ballot Organi- 
zation during recent months has been 
the preparation of a bill providing for 
the abolition of the office of coroner in 
New York City and substituting for it a 
scientific medical examiner system. The 
efforts of this organization were sec- 
onded by a committee composed of rep- 
resentatives of the various civic and 
medical societies. The study of the 
coroner's office revealed, as scarcely any 
previous investigation has done, the 
dangerous effects of entrusting great 
powers to a minor elective office. Under 
what might be termed the "long ballot" 
influence, the coroner's office in New 
York City — and what is true there is 
true practically everywhere else — has 
steadily degenerated. Not only have the 
laws governing the office ceased to com- 
mand the respect of the coroners, but 
from time to time they have been guilty 
of serious neglect and even more positive 
malfeasance without ever having at- 
tracted the attention of the public to 
their shortcomings. The office is es- 
sentially mediaeval in its conception and 
at least forty years behind the times in 
its present method of administration. 
An investigation into the workings of 
the coroner's office could be conducted 
with profit in all of our great metro- 
politan centres. 

The Secretary would be very glad to 
send to any reader of Equity a copy 
of the pamphlet explaining the present 
method of administration and giving the 
text of the measure prepared to meet 
the local situation. 



EQUITY SERIES 

Edited and Published by C. F. Taylor 



•RATIONAL MONEY." By Prof. Frank Parsons, of Boston University 

Law School. The only book on the money question which is fair and 
just to gold, silver, and every other product. This is the only fair and 
fimd solution of the money question that has yet been prepared. Paper 
Covers. Price, 25c. 

THE LAND QUESTION FROM VARIOUS POINTS OF VIEW." By 
Various Writers. History of Land Titles, Alien Landlordism in 
America, the Single Tax pro and con, John Stuart Mills' plan of Land 
Reform, etc., etc. No other single book gives the various phases of 
the land question. No student of the land question and really no voter 
can afford to be without this book. Paper Covers. Price, 25c. 

THE TELEGRAPH MONOPOLY." By Prof. Frank Parsons, of Boston 
University Law School. Here this question is presented in a fullness 
and completeness never before attempted. Paper Covers. Price, 25c. 
•THE BONDAGE OF CITIES." Consists of Chapter III from "The City 
for the People," with important new matter, and a Model Charter, for 
the preparation of which a fee of $100 was paid. Paper Covers. 
Price, 25c 

THE ORGANIZATION AND CONTROL OF INDUSTRIAL CORPORA- 
TIONS." 3y F. E. Horack, A.M., Ph.D. Reviews the corporation 
laws of all of our states, showing their diversity, complexity, and incon- 
gruity, and showing the need of a National Incorporating Law. Paper 
Covers. 207 Pages. Price, 25c. 

•THE STORY OF NEW ZEALAND." By Prof. Frank Parsons, Edited 
by C. F. Taylor. A volume describing the land and labor laws, com- 
pulsory arbitration, progressive taxation, co-operative industry, public 
enterprises, and novel methods in government established in New Zea- 
land, including government insurance, etc., etc. A magnificent, illus- 
trated, cloth bound volume of 860 pages. Price, $3.00. 

•ELEMENTS OF TAXATION." By N. M. Taylor. The only popular 
book on the general subject of Taxation ever published. 168 pages. 
Price, 25c. 

'THE RAILWAYS, THE TRUSTS, AND THE PEOPLE." By Prof. 

Frank Parsons. In two parts. Part I, Relations of the Railways to 
the Public. Part II, The Railroad Problem in the Light of Compara- 
tive Railroad History Covering the ^Leading Systems of Three Conti- 
nents. Price, 25c. per part in paper covers. Both parts bound together 
in a single volume in cloth, over 400 pages, $1.50. 

Address EQUITY SERIES 

1520 CHESTNUT STREET PHILADELPHIA, PA. 



STATEMENT 

of the ownership and management of Equity Series, published quarterly 
at 1520 Chestnut Street, Philadelphia, Pa., required by the Act of August 
24, 1912. & 

Editor, Managing Editor, Business Manager and Publisher, C. F. Taylor 
1520 Chestnut Street. 

Owner, C. F. Taylor, 1520 Chestnut Street. 
No bondholders or mortgagees. 

C. F. TAYLOR. 
□ to and subscribed before me this 17th day of September, 1913. 

Mary E. Hamer, Notary Public 
My commission expires January 25, 1915 



Equity 

[Formerly Equity Series] 

Devoted to Improved Methods of Self -Government, as the Initiative, 
Referendum, Recall, Proportional Representation, Direct Primaries, the 
Preferential Ballot, the Short Ballot, etc., and the simplification and 
increased efficiency of Government in Municipalities , States and Nation. 

is cents plr <XSy" Qu arterly Philadelphia, July, 1914 

Contents 

EDITORIAL: Page 

New York as a ''Horrible Example" 115 

Absurdities of the Politicians 118 

What is the "Popular Will?" 119 

A Canal Tolls Referendum •3C3| , Ws^ 

Why the People Seem Indifferent ; '^-*^35PmK. 

A Correction From Arden v^/ f Mf\NP \* f* 

THE INITIA TIVE, REFEREND UM A ND RECALL DEPA RTMENff \>p \ ** \ 

Letting the People Rule .Jl 7 1$1 

Majority Preferential Voting Systems C. 0^Hoag%A^i 

Review of New Books \. j£^>»»-127 ] 

- ■ 

THE MARCH OF POPULAR GOVERNMENT— Being a Quarterly Record of Ike 

Progress of Direct Legislation in the Various States 130 

California 130 Maryland 136 North Carolina 144 

Colorado 131 Massachusetts 136 Ohio 144 

Delaware 132 Mississippi 137 Oklahoma 146 

Idaho 133 Missouri 139 Oregon 146 

Indiana 135 New Jersey 141 Pennsylvania 146 

Louisiana 136 New York 142 Washington 147 

Map Showing Status of the I. & R. Movement in the U. S 160 

Why a "Bill of Rights?" 149 

Longer Terms Under the Recall 149 

PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION REVIEW: 

C. G. Hoag, Editor 

Notes 150 

Oregon ' 151 

A New York State P. R. League 152 

Ontario 153 

P. R. and the Irish Home Rule Bill 153 

Annual Meeting of the British P. R. Society 154 

South Africa, France, Holland, Denmark, Bulgaria, Switzerland, Western 

Australia 156-157 

THE SHORT BALLOT DEPARTMENT: 

H. S. Gilbertson, Editor 

The Right Kind of Short Ballot ; 158 

Short Ballot Legislatures 158 

Indiana 1 s Chance v 159 



Equity 

[Formerly Equity Series] 

Including the Direct Legislation Record, the Referendum News and the 
Proportional Representation Review. 



The purpose of this publication is to improve the »£«*£«£ %S%lV™&toom$Si 
mote West and efficie* t J^^t&ti The fatal if^That every American commun- 
under direct final control of the electorate, "£™£j simplest plan of self-government 
lty-town, ^^-'^S^SS^SiJStS^tS^S That every state shall have 
possible, resulting in the mostemciem governing y mor e efficient government: 

National issues whenever they may wish to do so. 



Charles Fremont Taylor, Editor and Publisher 
Edwin S. Potter, Associate Editor 

1520 Chestnut St., Philadelphia, Pa. 



editorial counsellors 



J. W. Sullivan, New York City 

Founder of the Direct Legislation Record 
Eltweed Pomeroy, Donna, Texas 

Former Editor of the Direct Legislation Record 
Geo. H. Shibley, Washington, D. C. 

Founder of the Referendum News 
W. S. U'Ren, Oregon, 

Father of the "Oregon System 
Senator Rob't. L. Owen 

President of the National Popular Govern- 
ment League 
Dr. Wm. Preston Hill, St. Louis, Mo. 

Father of the Initiative and Referendum in 
Missouri 
Robert M. La Follette 

U.S. Senator from Wisconsin 
Judge Ben B. Lindsey, Denver, Colo. 
Dr. John Randolph Haynes 
Los Angeles, Cal. 

Father of the Recall in California 
Dr. Wm. Draper Lewis, Philadelphia, Pa. 
Samuel Gompers 

President of American Federation of Labor 
Moses E. Clapp 

U. S. Senator from Minnesota 
Woodbridge N. Ferris 

Governor of Michigan 
George H. Hodges 

Governor of Kansas 



George E. Chamberlain 

U. S. Senator from Oregon 
J. H. Ralston, Washington, D. C. 
Delos F. Wilcox, New York 

L. F. C. Garvin 

Ex-Governor of Rhode Island 
George Norris 

U. S. Senator from Nebraska 
Miles Poind exter 

U. S. Senator from Washington 
Morris Sheppard 

U. S. Senator from Texas 
Prof. Chas. Zueblin 

Publicist and Lecturer 

M. Clyde Kelley 

Member of Congress from Pennsylvania 

William Allen White 

Editor- Emporia, Kan., Gazette 
Francis Kellor 

Chief of Progressive National Service 
Carl Vrooman, Bloomington, 111. 
Lieut. C. P. Shaw, Virginia 
George H. Duncan, New Hampshire 
James W. Bucklin, Grand Junction, Colo. 

Father of Grand Junction System of Prefer- 
ential Voting. 



Entered at the Philadelphia Post Office as Second-class Matter 



Single cpies, 15 cents; 50 cents per year; three years, $1. To facilitate the spread of the causes 
represented by this magazine, four yearly subscriptions will be sent to different addresses for $1 ; 
Epecial rates for yearly subscriptions or single numbers for propaganda purposes supplied on applic 
ation. 



STATEMENT 

of the ownership and management of Equity published 
Philadelphia, Pa., required by the Act of August 24, 1912. 
Editor, Managing Editor, Business Manager and Publisher, 
Owner, C. F. Taylor, 1520 Chestnut Street. 
No bondholders or mortgagees. 



quarterly at 1520 Chestnut Street, 
C. F. Taylor, 1520 Chestnut Street. 

C. F. TAYLOR. 



Sworn to and subscribed before me this 5th day of March, 1914. 

MARY E. HAMER, Notary Public. 
My commission expires January 25, 1915. 



EDITORIAL 



VOL. XVI— No. 3 July, 1914 



New York as a "Horrible Example." 

The final official tabulation of the 
votes cast in New York State, on 
April 7, on the proposition to call a 
convention in 1915, for the revision 
of the constitution of that state dis- 
closed the following result: 

For the convention 152,322 

Against the convention 151,969 

Majority for convention... 1,353 

Since the official return was pub- 
lished, charges of fraud in this elec- 
tion have been published, and an of- 
ficial investigation is in progress at 
this writing. Needless to say, Equity 
would be the first to repudiate any 
convention call based on fraudulent 
ballots. But even if this convention 
were to be prevented by the discovery 
of frauds, this would not affect the ar- 
guments based on the election returns 
as reported. 

The favorable majority was much 
smaller than at first reported, at the 
time the April Equity was going to 
press. As was to be expected, the 
relative smallness of the total vote 
as compared with the vote on candi- 
dates, afforded a rather exceptional 
opportunity for the opponents of the 
Referendum to air their views. The 
editors of the opposition newspapers 
were quick to note that the total vote 
was only about a sixth of the elector- 
ate, as recorded at the last general 
election of candidates for high public 
office. This was an apparent instance 
of what they are pleased to call 
"minority government," of which 
they profess to be in deep fear. 

But before coming to that, we want 
to get into the evidence of this pe- 
culiar case a further fact which the 
opposition editors are making much 



of. The returns showed that by far 
the larger part of the votes cast for 
the convention came from the Tam- 
many-controlled counties of Greater 
New York, Erie and one or two others 
and that in all the other "up-state" 
counties majorities were cast against 
the proposition. Thus it was perfect- 
ly true, as pointed out by the papers 
opposed to Tammany, that a few hun- 
dred Tammany votes in the big city 
had carried the convention proposition 
over the heads of all the rest of the 
state in so far as the rest of the 
state had taken pains to go to the 
polls on this question. 

Now here are the undisputed facts 
as to the result of this special election 
in New York. Let us examine closely 
the conclusions to which the chorus of 
critics have jumped. 

"The farcical vote," says the New 
York Evening Post in the course of 
an editorial, "has been the subject of 
much comment." But in another part 
of the same, the Post is judicial 
enough to observe as follows: "To 
draw general conclusions from the 
mere figures of so peculiar a case 
would be quite unjustifiable. But it 
may well serve as a reminder of the 
dangers attending a loose way of 
thinking on the general subject of the 
amending of constitutions, and espec- 
ially of the Constitution of the Uni- 
ted States." 

Most of the other critics are not so 
careful to qualify their conclusions 
from this "peculiar case." For in- 
stance, the New York Commercial 
reaches this broad conclusion: "The 
size and character of the vote cast 
proves the uselessness of a multiplic- 
ity of elections and the danger that 
will threaten this country if the In- 
itiative and Referendum should be 
adopted." Elsewhere the Commercial 
says that "it is easy for a minority 
party, well organized and determined, 



116 



to carry its point at such times and 
to defeat in that way the real wishes 
of the people." This is the tenor of 
numerous other comments. 

The New York Journal of Commerce 
says: "This farcical game was played 
in the name of more complete 'gov- 
ernment by the people.' " 

The New York Times says: "Yet 
this is a fairly typical referendum 
under the system which the advocates 
of direct government are pressing in 
various parts of the country. It was 
decreed by a small number of inter- 
ested persons. It was decided by a 
special election by a small majority 
of a very limited number of voters. 
Although the question submitted was 
of real importance, it was not one to 
arouse general interest. The whole 
process was precisely of that nature 
which politicians delight in. It is a 
fair sample of what will surely hap- 
pen and happen often, if the haphaz- 
ard referendum is to become an es- 
tablished part of our constitutional 
system." 

The Philadelphia Public Ledger 
says: "The fiasco in New York is typ- 
ical. As well look for the needle in 
the haystack as for the voice ©f the 
people in the ordinary Referendum." 

And so on, with variations, in hun- 
dreds of the opposition papers all ov- 
er the country, these instances select- 
ed as coming first to hand and from 
some of the largest and presumably 
ablest dailies in the East. What shall 
be said of such statements? Court- 
esy would suggest ignorance as the 
best excuse for them, but be the ex- 
planation what it may, let us endeav- 
or to present the truth of the whole 
situation in New York, which is thus 
held up by these hired newspaper 
writers, a horrible example of what 
may be expected of the Initiative and 
Referendum in practice. 
The case is "peculiar" in several 



Equity 

respects, as the Evening Post was 
fair enough to say, and let it be clear- 
ly understood that we are not under- 
taking the defense of the New York 
political forces responsible for this 
particular convention call nor of any 
of the alleged crookedness in con- 
nection therewith. We, along with 
all believers in popular government, 
deplored the eleventh-hour provision 
inserted in the call enabling party 
conventions to select the delegates 
instead of the direct primary process. 
But to say that this special election 
on the proposition for a constitutional 
convention is "typical" of the Refer- 
endum system is simply to make the 
person saying it ridiculous in the eyes 
of all who know the facts of the mat- 
ter, though it may, and probably will, 
deceive the many still in ignorance 
of the facts. And yet any one who 
stopped to think before swallowing 
this absurdity would discover its 
character. How could a special elec- 
tion, called in the usual way by legis- 
lative enactment for the submission 
of a proposal for a constitutional con- 
vention in a state, which as yet has 
never even considered the adoption 
of the Initiative and Referendum, ex- 
emplify those instruments in prac- 
tice? The people of New York State 
have not had any experience or prac- 
tice with these instruments to this 
date, and in this case, they did not 
have the benefit of the publicity de- 
vices, which ordinarily go along with 
the Initiative and Referendum to in- 
form every voter as to the matter un- 
der consideration. They have been 
accustomed, generation after genera- 
tion, since the state was orgar 



par 



the 



Union, to 
look to party leaders and to the 
chosen lawmakers for their changes 
in law, constitutional and statu- 
tory, and always the process of 



Editorial 



117 



ratification of constitutions has been 
very largely a pro forma process. 

It is sheer nonsense or worse for 
these newspaper critics, who know 
better, thus to undertake to confuse 
this present New York plebiscite with 
what might be reasonably expected 
when the State gets the Initiative 
and Referendum instruments adopted 
on a workable basis, as it surely will 
before a great while, despite such 
tactics of the opposition. 

Fortunately, we do not have to de- 
pend on a priori reasoning now as to 
this question, for we have a consider- 
able body of experience open to the 
inspection of all who will take the 
pains to look. What is the practice 
in a state like Oregon, which has used 
the Initiative and Referendum for 
twelve years ? The answer has re- 
cently been given with complete and 
authoritative data in an article for 
the National Municipal .Review for 
April, li)14, by Richard W. Montague 
of the Portland bar. There he has put 
into tabulated form the entire list of 
measures voted on in that state since 
1902, showing the total vote in each 
case and the percentage of that to the 
total average vote on officers. The 
vote on these measures is usually 
above 90 per cent, of the vote on of- 
ficers, and in only two or three in- 
stances does it fall below 75 per cent. 

But that is not the only perversion 
of the truth about this matter. A 
still more glaring and indefensible 
"error," to put it politely, is the as- 
sumption that the special election at 
which the New York convention call 
was voted on is typical of the condi- 
tions of the voting under the Initia- 
tive and Referendum. In the various 
states which have put in operation 
the Initiative and Referendum, the 
constitutional amendment always pro- 
vides that the initiated or referred 
measure shall be submitted to the 



voters "at the next general election." 
This is a fact and there is no sort of 
excuse for editorial writers on the big 
dailies to go on covering up or ignor- 
ing it. 

It is therefore manifest to any 
judicial minded observer that the vot- 
ers of New York have, as yet, had no 
practice in voting on measures, as 
distinguished from candidates in rela- 
tion to party platforms, and when it 
is considered that the I. and R. ma- 
chinery for publicity covering meas- 
ures to be voted on does not exist in 
New York, and that this convention 
proposition came forward from a 
Tammany-controlled legislature at a 
special election and with a partisan 
plan for selecting delegates attached, 
the wonder is that so large a vote 
was i 

And yet, it must be kept in mind 
that all of our constitutions and con- 
stitutional amendments have been 
ratified by popular votes, frequently 
with minority totals, but nevertheless 
without suggesting to any one that 
such fundamental law is thereby in- 
validated or without binding force on 
the whole community. Always it has 
I ton presumed, in such submissions of 
measures, that silence gives consent, 
where the opportunity is given to 
vote "no." That is the universal un- 
derstanding in the transaction of bus- 
iness by any sort of meeting of people 
proceeding under parliamentary rules 
except in cases where special rules 
require a percentage vote. Always 
the principle on which decisions are 
properly made is that of a majority 
of the votes cast on a given proposi- 
tion. This does not insure that the 
decisions will be always wise. It 
does mean that the decisions will 
represent the present intelligence of 
the community interested. It is, in 
fact, the only way of obtaining gov- 
ernment by intelligence as opposed 



118 



Equity 



to government by ignorance or indif- 
ference. 

But suppose that a mistake is made 
in a certain case and that an injustice 
is done to some part of the commun- 
ity. (It will not be contended that, 
under the existing method of leaving 
the legislature to its unchecked and 
uncontrolled will, serious mistakes of 
legislation are not of frequent occur- 
rence). With the Initiative in their 
hands, the voters of the community 
who feel that a mistake has been 
made, may proceed in due time to 
make a definite correction, provided 
that a majority of the voters inter- 
ested in the particular question so de- 
sire, after both sides of the question 
have been duly presented and dis- 
cussed. 

The net result of this system of 
popular control of the representative 
legislature by the voters must, in the 
long run, be an increase in the gener- 
al intelligence of the electorate, thus 
curing the very condition of affairs 
illustrated in the New York conven- 
tion referendum, and others of like 
character. 

The adoption of this system does 
not mean that the powerful forces of 
special privilege, which have grown 
up under the existing system of mis- 
representation, will immediately dis- 
appear. Nor does it insure that these 
forces may not in certain instances 
succeed in controlling these weapons 
of popular government. But they 
cannot expect to fool the people long 
if the people have the power in their 
hands to express their will as to 
measures as well as to candidates. 
All that the people could do in times 
past was to vote blindly for one party 
and then for another party, thereby 
merely exchanging one set of bosses 
for another, until it began to be un- 
derstood that both sets of bosses 
were secretly in the employ of an in- 



ner bi-partisan ring or coterie of all- 
powerful financial or corporation 
masters. 

The New York Times, in the 
course of its editorial on the conven- 
tion vote, argues that the advocates 
of "direct government" ignore the 
chief cause of the growth of the poli- 
tical machine, which it says is "the 
fact that the voters have been oblig- 
ed to vote too often, to vote for too 
many candidates, to select too many 
agents for duties of relative unim- 
portance." But the Times fails to 
note the highly important fact that 
in nearly every state where the Ini- 
tiative and Referendum have been 
made reasonably operative, these very 
conditions have been promptly remed- 
ied or at least steps have been taken 
toward remedies, such as the direct 
primary, the short ballot, etc. And it 
is through the Initiative that states 
may most readily achieve that final 
great improvement, true representa- 
tion in legislative bodies through pro- 
portional election of legislators. 

What prospect, we would like to 
ask the New York Times, is there for 
the improvement of the political ma- 
chinery through the existing boss- 
controlled legislatures, or even 
through a constitutional convention, 
the members of which are to be 
chosen on a partisan basis ? This is 
the question studiously ignored by 
the shallow and biased critics, who 
seized upon the New York convention 
vote as an illustration of how the 
Referendum works. 



Absurdities of the Politicians. 

"It is a most unpleasant position," 
says Harper's Weekly, in commenting 
on the progress of the I. and R. move- 
ment, "for a politician desiring the 
suffrages of the people to have to tell 
them that they are not competent to 
pass upon the laws which he wishes 



Editorial 



119 



to enact for them." Yes, and it isn't 
particularly consistent with the same 
politician's common declaration that 
he is the servant of the people, or 
with that other assertion that the 
people should rule. But the people 
are now beginning to get wise to 
these absurdities of the politicians, 
for they have found out the way in 
which to really take control of their 
affairs — not by dismissing the legis- 
lature but by requiring of that serv- 
ant body definite results on penalty of 
having its work reviewed at the polls. 
This must mean that in the long 
run more expert and more consci- 
entious legislators will be elected; 
also that in all probability the form 
of state legislatures will be changed 
in the direction of smaller member- 
ship and a single body having far 
greater efficiency, but always under 
the checks of the popular Initiative 
and Referendum. 



What is the "Popular Will? 

The Syracuse Journal, in referring 
to the vote on the New York constitu- 
tional convention, said that the total 
was a disappointment because it fail- 
ed "to register the popular will, even 
taking into due consideration the fact 
that many voters by their failure to 
act gave a modified consent." It is 
fair to assume that a considerable 
portion of the New York electorate 
did thus indicate a kind of assent in 
the sense that they did not oppose 
the proposition when they might have 
done so. Certainly, the number of 
voters who did not thus give their as- 
sent to the proposition are negligible 
for all practical purposes in connec- 
tion with the matter in hand; that is, 
all who did not intend to give assent 
by silence. 

What, after all, constitutes the 
"popular will" on any given proposi- 
tion concerning public affairs? Is it 



made up of those ignorant, dormant, 
neutral and indifferent factors of a 
community who fail, for whatever 
reasons, to cast a "yes" or "no" bal- 
lot on a proposition submitted to the 
voters at a given election? Or, is it 
composed of the opinions, whether for 
or against the proposition, of all 
those voters who, for whatever rea- 
sons, know or care enough about the 
matter to go to the polls and vote 
thereon? To any candid mind there 
can be no hesitation in seeing that 
the counting of the majority of the 
latter group or citizens is the only 
practical way of discovering the 
"popular will." 



A Canal Tolls Referendum. 

In the course of the recent Senate 
debate on the proposed repeal of the 
act exempting coastwise American 
shipping from the payment of tolls 
for the use of the Panama Canal, 
Senator Borah offered a resolution to 
have the whole question deferred un- 
til after the general elections next 
November. This resolution set forth 
that inasmuch as all party platforms 
in 1912 did favor such tolls exempt- 
ion, the voters really had no oppor- 
tunity to express themselves on that 
matter. The inference of the resolu- 
tion, and it was so translated in the 
newspaper dispatches from Washing- 
ton, was that to defer the action of 
Congress until the next session would 
provide a sort of popular referendum 
on this question. 

Here is a fair illustration of the 
need of a process for obtaining a real 
and definite expression of the voters 
on a great issue involving the rights 
and obligations of the nation, and 
about which the legislators are differ- 
ing. But it is also an illustration of 
the absurdity of regarding the mere 
deferring of the tolls repeal question 
until after the next election as provid- 



120 



Equity 



Lng any sort of a popular referendum 
worth while. For, as any one with 
half an eye can see, the election of 
congressmen and various state offic- 
ers in November must be determined 
on a variety of local, state and na- 
tional considerations hopelessly mixed 
up with the availability of candidates 
for office, some committed to one 
thing and some to another, the tolls 
question being only one of many de- 
manding the attention of candidates 
and voters. After it is all over, how 
can any party or set of candidates be 
held to account on this question? 

Here's food for thought, surely. 
Why not have this question definitely 
submitted to the voters at the coming 
regular election by a clear statement 
of the case on the congressional and 
senatorial ballots in such form that 
voters can express their views with 
a definite "yes" or "no?" This would 
be a real Referendum; and, it is per- 
fectly clear that such a Referendum 
would clear the atmosphere and re- 
solve the whole bothersome problem 
and fix the responsibility where it 
belongs — with the people. 



Why the People Seem Indifferent. 

"As a strict matter of theory," 
says the Austin (Texas) Herald, 
"there is no argument that can stand 
against the proposition for the Ini- 
tiative and Referendum. As a prac- 
tical proposition, however, it meets 
the gravest doubt because experience 
shows, every time an election is held 
on a specific issue instead of on can- 
didates, that the people don't care a 
great deal about their affairs." Often 
it does look that way on the surface, 
with the people having as yet very 
little experience in real self-govern- 
ment. But nothing could be further 
from the truth. The difficulty is 
that the people have not yet learned 
to see that certain proposed measures 



are "their affairs." That is where 
the tremendous educational value of 
the Initiative and Referendum is to 
be seen. The people need to learn 
what are their affairs, and they can 
learn this only by having the oppor- 
tunity and the responsibility put di- 
rectly up to them repeatedly. They 
can never hope to learn the lesson 
by ignorantly or emotionally voting 
for first one set of office hunters and 
then for another, with little or no 
reference to specific measures to be 
enacted into law. 



If the representative legislature is 
the creature and servant of the elec- 
tors, why should the latter go on for- 
ever with the flattering fiction of 
their subserviency to the elected law- 
makers — remnant of the by-gone age 
of absolutism in government — by us- 
ing the term "petition" when express- 
ing the will of the voters? Why not 
call it by its right name and say 
"mandate?" 



Arden, DeL 



A Correction From Arden. 

The old saying is that you have to 
go away from home to get the news 
about home. The village of Arden, 
Del., where the single tax system of 
land holding is undergoing a prac- 
tical demonstration, is almost a sub- 
urb of Philadelphia, and yet it ap- 
pears from the following letter from 
Frank Stephens, the founder of Ar- 
den, that we have not kept pace with 
the progress of that village. 
Editor Equity,. 

Dear Sir: 

Allow me to correct that very 
unusual thing — an error in your ex- 
cellent magazine. On page 16 of the 
January issue, it is said of the Hare 
Ballot, "It is in successful use 
in various parts of the world, but no- 
where, as yet, in our great and sup- 
posedly progressive country." 

Let me enter a modest protest on 
behalf of the village of Arden,. which 
in addition to holding its land in com- 
mon and exempting labor and labor 
products from taxation by the Single 
Tax System of Henry George, is the 
first community in the United States to 
establish the Raiffeisen System of 
Credit Union, to extend the suffrage to 
those below the arbitrary and absurd 
limit of 21 years and to use the single 
transferable vote system, which is 
provided by its Constitution for the 
election of the Board of Assessors. 
Sincerely yours, 

Frank Stephens. 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



121 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department. 

Continuing the Direct Legislation Record, which the first publication devoted to the Initiative 
and Referendum. It was started in New Jersey, in 1893, by J. W. Sullivan, as the organ for the 
National Direct Legislation League and various State Leagues. It was continued from 1894 to 
1904 by Mr. Eltweed Pomeroy, and revived and included in Equity Series 'n 1906. 

Also continuing the Referendum News, formerly published in Washington, D. C, Dy Mr. Geo. 
H. Shibley, and consolidated with Equity Series early in 1907. 



LETTING THE PEOPLE RULE. 

How and by Whom the Instrumental- 
ities now Universally Known as the 
Initiative, Referendum and Recall 
Were First Brought Forward and 
Made Into a Live Public Issue Be- 
fore the American People. 



By Edwin S. Potter 

A new process of self government 
today knocks loudly at the door of 
this nation. Indeed, in a number of 
the states it has already been ad- 
mitted, while in the others the ques- 
tion of opening the door is under 
more or less heated discussion. This 
process comes not to supercede the ex- 
isting forms of representative govern- 
ment in this great American republic, 
but to improve them. It comes to 
make those forms truly representa- 
tive and therefore more efficient. 

This improved process of self gov- 
ernment is now known to millions of 
American citizens as the Initiative 
and Referendum applying to meas- 
ures, and the Recall applying to of- 
ficials. Our people know this move- 
ment is here. But very few know 
anything about how it got here. 

The Initiative and Referendum are 
now incorporated in the Constitutions 
of eighteen States and the movement 
has become a political issue in a large 
number of the states, where organized 
parties have adopted the principle of 
the Initiative and Referendum as 



planks of their platforms. In nearly 
300 municipalities these new instru- 
ments are in actual operation as part 
of the system of commission govern- 
ment- 

Under such circumstances there is 
undoubtedly a very general need of 
information about the beginnings and 
development of a political movement 
so deeply concerning the welfare of 
the nation, from whatever point view- 
ed. 

Since the year 1874 the system of 
popular Referendum on laws has been 
in vogue in Switzerland on the basis 
of petitions signed by a certain per- 
centage of the voters. It was from 
the experience of that country that 
the American movement had its ex- 
ample and incentive. 

Just 25 years ago the seed of this 
idea was transplanted from the moun- 
tain fastnesses of the Swiss republic 
to the great sister republic of the 
new world by an American citizen 
who had gone to Switzerland for the 
express purpose of studying that 
system of popular government. That 
man was James W. Sullivan, then a 
leader of thought in the labor move- 
ment in this country and now a rec- 
ognized expert in civic reform and 
social investigation. He had been at 
one time editor of the Union Printer 
of New York, and also at another per- 
iod editor of the Weekly Bulletin of 
the Garment Workers of America. 

In 1888 Mr. Sullivan gave up all 
active labor connections in order to go 



122 



Equity 



to Switzerland. He spent about a 
year in studying the operations of the 
Swiss system of government through 
the people's control as expressed by 
means of the Initiative and Referen- 
dum. Upon his return he began an 
enthusiastic advocacy of these instru- 
ments for the government of labor 
unions, and then for the use of the 
voters of our cities and states. He 
saw in these instruments the means of 
loosening the deadly coils of the ser- 
pent of party bossism. To Mr. Sul- 
livan's efforts, more than to those of 
any other one person, the start to- 
ward this system was due. 

Besides conducting a department on 
the subject in the pages of the weekly 
Twentieth Century, Mr. Sullivan 
wrote numerous articles dealing with 
various phases of this subject for the 
daily papers and monthly magazines, 
and in 1891 he brought out a book 
that was destined to have much to do 
with modifying the form of govern- 
ment in this country. It was entitled 
"Direct Legislation in Switzerland." 
The type for this book Mr. Sullivan 
set himself, being a journeyman 
printer by trade. He also bore all the 
expenses connected with the publica- 
tion. The sales for this book became 
very large and would have paid a 
profit to the author, but instead, he 
deliberately lowered the price of the 
book to bare cost so that more people 
might be able to have it. Until 1895 
the book had an annual sale of from 
ten to fifteen thousand copies. It 
was the first book published on this 
feature of the Swiss government in 
this country, and it undoubtedly made 
a profound impression on many 
minds. 

Samuel Gompers, as president of 
the American Federation of Labor, 
had known of the work of Mr. Sulli- 
van and became one of the most en- 
thusiastic followers of him on this 



question of "direct legislation," as it 
was then generally expressed. To- 
gether they campaigned to introduce 
its use in the government of labor 
unions. Both Gompers and Sullivan 
spoke at numerous meetings of th* 
unions and caused the labor press to 
take the matter up. 

But this was only a preparation for 
the larger work ahead, which was to 
be the application of the Initiative 
and Referendum to the government of 
cities and of states. In 1891 Sullivan 
and a few friends organized in New 
Jersey the People's Power League, 
for the purpose of agitation, of which 
Sullivan was chosen president. This 
was superceded in 1892 by the Direct 
Legislation League of New Jersey, 
into the work of which came a new 
and strong mind, that of Eltweed 
Pomeroy, who served as secretary, 
while William A. Cotter was made 
president. 

Mr. Pomeroy, who now is actively 
developing a large fruit ranch at 
Donna, Texas, has written us his 
memories of this period. He says 
that it was in 1893 that Sullivan 
started the "Direct Legislation Rec- 
ord" as a monthly, but that only a 
few issues were sent out. But in 1894, 
with the consent of Sullivan, he 
(Pomeroy) revived the "Direct Legis- 
lation Record" and published it as a 
quarterly in connection with the New 
Jersey campaign. It was during this 
period that the proposition for the 
Initiative and Referendum was 
brought to a vote in the New Jersey 
legislature and in the New York 
Constitutional Convention of 1894, re- 
ceiving surprisingly high votes but 
short of majorities. 

According to Pomeroy, the National 
Direct Legislation League was not 
started until 1896, at and during the 
Populist National Convention at St. 
Louis. This was rather discouraged 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



125 



at the time by Sullivan, who was 
afraid of having the movement con- 
nected with Populism or, perhaps, 
with any one party. But Pomeroy 
saw that it was the only opportunity 
for a really national gathering on the 
subject and persisted, with the help 
of N. O. Nelson, Dr. Wm. Preston 
Hill and others. Pomeroy was made 
president of the League and the "Di- 
rect Legislation Record" its organ. 
Prior to that the publication had 
been the organ of the New Jersey 
and other state leagues as they came 
into being. 

These tangible advances further 
stimulated discussions of the whole 
question in the newspapers of the na- 
tion, but at the time the progress 
seemed very slow and the indifference 
of the general public would have dis- 
couraged any one less resolute and 
fixed in purpose than Mr. Sullivan, 
Mr. Pomeroy, and others, who came 
to their support. Prominent among 
these recruits was Mr. George H. 
Shibley, a law book publisher, who 
gave of his time and money to publish 
the Referendum News at Washing- 
ton, D. C, as the organ of the Nation- 
al Referendum League. 

Mr. Shibley, who now is the direc- 
tor of the American Bureau of Poli- 
tical Research with headquarters at 
Washington, D. C, writes us that it 
was not until after the election of 
1900, after the defeat of the three 
combined reform parties of that year, 
that he turned to the program "for 
the establishment in the people of a 
power to directly legislate should 
their representatives fail to act, and 
a power to veto the acts of repre- 
sentatives." He had heard of the 
Winetka experiment in municipal self 
government, and he thought the plan 
could be applied throughout the 
country. So he went heart and soul 
into the work of using labor unions 



and granges and of forming special 
leagues. To that end he and associ- 
ates issued a volume entitled "The 
Trust Problem Solved," showing in 
detail how the people were to take 
over the control of their own affairs. 
This and other matter was published 
in the labor journals and distributed 
as congressional documents. 

From October, 1905 to October, 
1906, Mr. Shibley published at Wash- 
ington, the monthly magazine called 
The Referendum News, one of the 
numbers of which was a campaign 
text-book. "Then for several months," 
writes Mr. Shibley, "the People's 
Rule Movement was without a paper 
along technical lines until the patriot- 
ic and far-seeing Dr. Taylor estab- 
lished as a quarterly review the now 
famous Equity." 

An important factor in the Initia- 
tive and Referendum movement was 
the work of the gifted Prof. Frank 
Parsons, formerly of the Boston Uni- 
versity Law School. In the late 90's 
he was authorized by Dr. Charles F. 
Taylor to prepare a book on munici- 
pal government, which under the 
hands of these two earnest workers 
grew into an elaborate and exhaustive 
volume entitled "The City for the 
People." This book had a wide popu- 
larity among students and others all 
over the country, about 7,000 copies 
having been printed and distributed, 
a large circulation for a work of that 
kind. It is still in demand but, un- 
fortunately, is now out of print. 

The second chapter of this book, 
consisting of 132 pages, is devoted 
to "Direct Legislation" and this 
chapter was and, perhaps, still is the 
clearest and most complete presenta- 
tion of the arguments for, as well as 
those against, the Initiative and 
Referendum. Dr. Taylor afterward 
had this chapter published as a sep- 
arate volume with additional notes, 



124 



Equity 



to bring it to date, and this volume 
also had a large circulation all over 
the country, but it, too, has now been 
long out of print. 

The following paragraph from page 
257 of "The City for the People" 
shows Professor Parsons to have 
been a prophet as well as a clear 
thinker: 

"The judicial Referendum is where 
a law that has been declared uncon- 
stitutional must be submitted to the 
people for the final decision under a 
fixed rule to that effect, or may be so 
submitted by the court, or by a speci- 
fied number of judges." 

The more important parts of this 
chapter by Professor Parsons may 
also be found in Senate Document No. 
360, entitled "Direct Legislation" as 
revised and edited in 1912 by Milton 
T. Uren of the San Francisco Bar, 
and secretary of the Direct Legisla- 
tion League of California. 

When both the Referendum News 
and the Direct Legislation Record had 
languished into suspension for lack 
of financial resources, these maga- 
zines were revived and incorporated 
in Equity Series, under the person- 
al direction and ownership of Dr. 
Charles F. Taylor of Philadelphia, by 
whom the publication is now carried 
on as Equity, the one magazine de- 
voted exclusively to the National 
movement for improved methods in 
popular government. 

Dr. Taylor is the editor and publish- 
er of The Medical World, but in addi- 
tion to his professional work, his at- 
tention had been attracted to the Ini- 
tiative and Referendum movement in 
the early nineties. He was one of 
the early fellow workers with Pom- 
eroy, whom, he aided in carrying 
along the Direct Legislation Record. 
Dr. Taylor now says that his interest 
in this movement gradually became 
so great that he felt impelled to con- 



centrate his entire spare time and re- 
sources in it, to the exclusion of all 
other interests. 

The purpose of this sketch is to 
make clear and authoritative the 
early beginnings of this movement, 
rather than to present a roster of its 
present-day leaders and advocates. It 
is worthy of note, however, that an 
effort has recently been made to cor- 
relate the various state movements 
for the I. and R. in a national organ- 
ization known as the Popular Govern- 
ment League with headquarters at 
Washington, of which Senator Owen 
is the president, and Mr. Judson 
King the secretary and organizer. 
Mr. King's exceptional ability as an 
organizer and campaigner was recog- 
nized several years ago by Dr. Tay- 
lor, who directed and financed his 
activities in several successful state 
campaigns. Mr. King was for a 
short time associate editor of Equity. 

In the past decade, following the 
successful working out of the Initia- 
tive and Referendum in Oregon, un- 
der the able and devoted leadership 
of U'Ren, a host of state and 
local champions of the great cause of 
popular government have entered the 
lists. And as state after state has 
swung into line with the adoption of 
a constitutional amendment or with 
statutes giving cities the right to use 
the direct powers of the Initiative, 
Referendum and Recall, many nation- 
al party leaders, members of con- 
gress and senators have openly es- 
poused the idea, including the na- 
tion's present chief executive and his 
distinguished premier. 



The demand for the Initiative and 
Referendum is all the stronger when 
not tied up to any particular measure 
or policy. It is an instrument design- 
ed to express the popular will, wheth- 
er progressive or conservative. 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



125 



Majority Preferential 
Voting Systems 



In this article we shall assume that 
our readers all have access to a copy 
of the U. S. Senate Document on 
Effective Voting, issued in January, 
1914*. In that document were dis- 
cussed the Bucklin, the Ware, and the 
Nanson systems of majority prefer- 
ential voting. Now I want to discuss 
some possible modifications of those 
systems. 

An interesting modification of 
the Bucklin system, which has doubt- 
less occurred to many persons who 
give thought to these matters, has 
been urged by Dr. C. F. Taylor and 
has independently been incorporated 
by the Charter Commissioners of 
Seattle in the charter that is to be 
submitted to the voters of that city 
on June 30th — after this article must 
be in the hands of the printer. 

As Dr. Taylor urges it, this modi- 
fication is the reckoning of second- 
choice votes, when they are counted 
in according to the Bucklin system, 
as having less than 100%, say 85%, 
of the value of first-choice votes; the 
reckoning of third-choice votes as 
having a still lower value, say 65%, 
etc. Dr. Taylor does not insist on 
any particular percentages, but he 
does insist that lower choice votes 
should not be counted as equal to 
higher choice votes. 

The form taken by this modification 
in the proposed Seattle charter will 
be seen from the following passage 
from the text of the charter itself, 
(a) Candidates receiving a ma- 
jority of all first choice votes cast 
for any office shall be elected. If no 
candidate receive a majority of 
the first choice votes cast for the 
office in question, a canvass shall 
then be made of the second choice 
votes received by the candidates 
for such office. The total of second 
choice votes of each candidate 



shall then be divided by two and 
the quotient (disregarding frac- 
tions) added to the first choice 
votes received by such candidate, 
and the candidate who by such ad- 
dition shall receive a majority of 
all first and second choice votes 
(counting second choice votes at 
one-half value) shall be elected. 

( b ) If no candidate receive a ma- 
jority by adding first and second 
choice votes as directed in the next 
preceding subsection, a canvass 
shall then be made of the third 
choice votes received by the candi- 
dates for said office. The total of 
third choice votes received by each 
candidate shall then be divided by 
three, and the quotient (disregard- 
ing fractions) added to the com- 
bined first and second choice vote 
for such candidate, and the candi- 
date who by such addition shall 
receive a majority of all first, sec- 
ond and third choice votes (count- 
ing second choice votes at one-half 
value and third choice votes at 
one-third) shall be elected. 

(c) If no candidate receive a ma- 
jority by adding first, second and 
third choice votes as directed in 
the next preceding subsections, the 
process of adding the next lower 
preferences shall then be contin- 
ued until some candidate has a ma- 
jority of all the votes cast for the 
office in question (counting second 
choice votes at one-half value, 
third choice votes at one-third 
value, fourth choice votes at one- 
fourth value, and so on to the low- 
est preference expressed for any 
candidate for the office in ques- 
tion.) 

(d) If no candidate receive a ma- 
jority by counting first, second, 
third and all further choices down 
to the lowest preference express- 
ed for the office in question, as di- 
rected in the next preceding sub- 
sections, then the candidate who 
receives the highest number of 
votes by such addition of all the 
preferences expressed shall be 
elected. 

(e) A tie 



♦Any reader of this article who has 
not received a copy of the document 
may get one gratis by applying to C. 
G. Hoag, Tamworth, N. H. (after Oct. 
1st, 1914. Haverford, Pa.) 



126 

To show the reader how the voters 
are allowed, according to the proposed 
Seattle charter, to express more pre- 
ferences than are usually allowed un- 
der the Bucklin system, I will also 
quote from the charter the para- 
graphs on the "Form of Ballot." 

"The ballots shall be substanti- 
ally in the following form: 

General (or Special) Election, 
City of Seattle, to be held 



19. 



Official ballot for use in (desig- 
nation of precinct to be printed or 
stamped) . 

"Direction to voters: To vote for 
candidates, write the figure "1" 
opposite the name of your first 
choice for any office. You may ex- 
press as many additional prefer- 
ences as you please by writing the 
figure "2" opposite the name* of 
your second choice, the figure "3" 
opposite the name of your third 
choice, and so on. You may also 
write in the blank space provided 
below each group, the name of any 
other person or persons for whom 
you desire to vote, or attach a 
paster bearing the printed name 
of any such person or persons. 

"Do not write more than one 
number opposite the same name. 

"If you spoil this ballot, tear it 
across once, return to the election 
officer and get another. 



(Name) 



(Domicile 
Address) 



(Vote 
(Occu- in this 
pation) column 



John Doe 
Richard Roe 
Henry Poe 
James Hoe 
William Coe 



"Insert here (or on separate bal- 
lot) propositions and other mat- 
ters, if any, to be voted on, with 
appropriate directions to voters 
printed in a conspicuous position." 
This Seattle-Bucklin system, as it 
might be called, appears on its face 
to be clearly superior to the Bucklin 
plan unmodified. It can readily be 
shown, however, to be capable of giv- 
ing an incorrect result; and a 
thoughtful critic of these matters has 



Equity 

explained, in private letters to the 
writer, why he believes that in prac- 
tice it will not be found to be on the 
whole preferable to the Bucklin plan. 
Without giving his argument in this 
article, I leave it to the readers of 
Equity to give the whole question of 
majority preferential voting thorough 
study and to make any suggestions 
of value that they can. Though in 
my own opinion we shall do well to 
cut down greatly the number of of- 
ficials we vote for at the polls by any 
sort of majority or plurality system, 
since we can best combine efficiency 
with democracy by running our gov- 
ernments almost entirely through de- 
liberative bodies elected by propor- 
tional representation, nevertheless for 
some years to come there will be 
many non-deliberative officials to be 
elected at the polls and therefore 
many uses for a majority preferential 
voting system that is as nearly cor- 
rect as such a system can be without 
being too complicated in the counting 
to be acceptable to the voters in their 
present stage of enlightenment on 
these matters. It is perhaps worth 
while to warn any of our readers who 
may undertake to throw light on this 
problem that nothing is to be gained 
by rushing, cock-sure, into the arena 
of discussion until one has given the 
problem considerable thought frcm 
many points of view. We must take 
into account, in considering any sys- 
tem, not only the probability of its 
correctness in the interpretation of 
the will of the voters as expressed 
but its probable effect on the express- 
ion of their wills on the ballots by the 
voters in the first place. We must 
take into account also the probable 
effect of the system on nominations, 
party grouping, and party loyalty. 

Another suggestion that has been 
made recently is that perhaps the 
best majority preferential system, of 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



127 



those under which the counting would 
be distinctly easier than that of the 
Nanson system itself, would be the 
Nanson system modified simply by 
declaring elected the candidate who 
shows the best record of preference 
numbers on the first Nanson count. 
It is easy to adduce a set of ballots, 
for example, the fifteen ballots stud- 
ied in the Senate Document on 
Effective Voting, which this shortened 
Nanson system will count correctly 
and which most of the other systems 
will count incorrectly. But, on the 
other hand, there is no question but 
that this shortened Nanson system 
will elect the wrong man in some 
cases. The practical question, then, 
for anyone to consider who is thinking 
of advocating this as a compromise 
system for public elections, is this: 
Is the system the best one, on the 
whole, taking into account ease of 
counting as well as all the more im- 
portant considerations, to advocate 
generally for popular elections in 
which non-deliberative officials are to 
be elected? 

Before closing I want to call to the 
attention of all who will undertake to 
help in the solution of this problem 
the fact that the third of the three 
majority preferential systems, the 
Ware, should not be neglected. The 
effect of the Ware system on the 
grouping of voters, and on the loyalty 
to a group of each voter in it, is 
thought by some thorough students 
of electoral reform to be especially 
salutary. 

The Ware system, then, its trun- 
cated form, invented by Mr. Daniel 
S. Remsen, which is now in use for 
primary elections in Wisconsin and 
elsewhere, and its other possible mod- 
ifications should be duly considered. 
In this matter we should "prove all 
things and hold fast that which is 
good." C. G. Hoag. 



Review of New Books 



The "Story of the California Legis- 
lature of 1913," by Franklin Hich- 
born. Published by the James H. 
Barry Company, 1122 Mission Street, 
San Francisco; price, $1.50. 

In the matter of self-help, the new- 
born babe has somewhat the better 
of the new-born legislator. That 
statement will not be disputed by 
anyone who has observed the strug- 
gles of the new-born legislator to find 
out why he is and what he wants. 
In fact, many a man who has arrived 
at the adult stage of legislative life 
would have some difficulty in answer- 
ing the question, "What are you doing 
here?" 

I am reminded of this by Franklin 
Hichborn'fl "Story of the California 
Legislature of 1913," a book of 400 
pages, which is invaluable to any stud- 
ent of legislatures and legislation. 
This is the third story of the Cali- 
fornia Legislature that Mr. Hichborn 
has published. The first was writ- 
ten after the Legislature of 1909 ad- 
journed, and the second was the story 
of the 1911 Legislature. The three 
books are a history of a transition 
and a political revolution in Califor- 
nia, in so far as the Legislature is 
concerned. 

With the adjournment of the 1909 
Legislature, the control of legislation 
in California passed out of the hands 
of the Southern Pacific machine. By 
the election of 1910, the friends of 
the Initiative, Referendum and Recall, 
of equal suffrage, of a practical direct 
primary law and a good Australian 
ballot obtained possession of the legis- 
lature, and Hiram W. Johnson was 
made Governor. The 1911 Legisla- 
ture submitted Initiative, Referen- 
dum, Recall and equal suffrage amend- 
ments, and they were adopted at the 
special election held in October, 1911. 
Thus the people of California had 



128 



direct checks upon their Legislature. 
The power of special privilege to en- 
act evil legislation was taken away, 
and the 1913 Legislature was con- 
fronted with the work of constructive 
legislation. 

The clearing away of brush in order 
to build a good road is an easier job 
than building the road. So the Legis- 
lature of 1913 discovered. Special 
interests could not jam bad legisla- 
tion through the body, but they could 
confuse the Legislature, and tangle 
it up, and thus prevent it from doing 
all the constructive work that should 
have been done. 

As Hichborn shows in his book, 
this was due to: 1. Lack of experi- 
ence of legislators, elected for short 
terms, in constructive work. 2. Hav- 
ing a Legislature composed of two 
houses that seldom co-operate or co- 
ordinate, instead of one house. 3. 
Lack of a Legislative Reference 
Bureau. 4. Inadequate compensation 
of legislators. 5. The employment of 
inexperienced clerks. And, while 
Hichborn does not say so, the fact 
sticks out all through his book that 
one of the big obstacles to construc- 
tive work is private ownership of pub- 
lic utilities. 

After having shown the facts, 
Hichborn says, in his chapter on 
"Remedies," that for the proper per- 
formance of the State's business, the 
State should have all the time of its 
legislators; that if legislators are to 
do their work properly they must be 
adequately compensated; and that a 
legislature of two chambers is un- 
wieldly, cumbersome, ineffective and 
likely to break down when put to the 
test. 

These things have been obvious for 
many years to those students of leg- 
islatures and legislation who are fam- 



Equity 

iliar with legislative work. From the 
standpoint of public interest and of 
efficiency, there is not a single argu- 
ment in favor of having a legislature 
of two chambers. True, two chambers 
give us "checks and balances;" but 
the checks are merely checks upon 
efficiency, and the balances are but 
balances of absurdities. 

After having reported ten sessions 
of legislatures, and having known 
personally every member of those ten 
sessions, I can say that for the legis- 
lative reporter, for the legislator or 
candidate for the Legislature, and for 
the citizen who wants efficiency in a 
legislative body and wonders why it 
has not been attained, Franklin Hich- 
born's book is a liberal education if 
read with understanding. As to Hich- 
born himself, to those who know the 
Sacramento Bee, it is sufficient to say 
that he is the legislative reporter for 
the Bee — which he would not be if 
he were not reliable, efficient and im- 
partial. 

Lynx Haines. 
Washington, D. C. 



Organized Democracy. An introduc- 
tion to the study of American politics. 
By Frederick A. Cleveland. Ph. D.. L. 
L. D., 471 pages. Price. $2.50. Pub- 
lished by Longmans, Green & Co., New 
York. 

This is a study of the development 
of democracy from earliest times. It 
is clear and brief, tho' the extent of 
the ground covered and the complete- 
ness of the analyses make the book 
quite voluminous. It is critical but 
helpful. The author is optimistic, 
and he is not afraid to indicate the 
bearing of his opinions — indeed he 
states his convictions with freedom, 
but not with dogmatism. On page 
379 occurs the following: 

"The progress of the Initiative and 
the Referendum has been marked and 
experience augurs welt for future 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



129 



tention. It is believed, however, that 
the chief merit of legislation through 
the electorate in the future will be to 
show to private and corporate inter- 
ests the futility of attempting to sub- 
vert the functions of government or 
to delay welfare legislation; and that 
for this reason the actual use of this 
more difficult method of enacting laws 
will always be limited. The Initia- 
tive and the Referendum are cumber- 
some methods of obtaining results, 
but they are sure, and add strength 
by inspiring confidence on the part of 
the people in the integrity and virtue 
of their institutions ; they place the 
electorate, as the broad representa- 
tive agency of organized citizenship, 
above the official class for determin- 
ing all matters of policy with re- 
spect to which undue influence may be 
used; they give to citizens a more di- 
rect interest in public business since 
each citizen is free to discuss ques- 
tions of business with electors; in 
fact the whole body politic partici- 
pates in the consideration of meas- 
ures thus submitted, the voting alone 
being confined to the electorate." 

On page 384, concerning the Recall: 

"The worst violation of public 
trust by the Los Angeles councilmen 
was the proposal to grant a valuable 
franchise for nothing, and this pro- 
posal was defeated by a mere threat 
to use the recall against every coun- 
cilman who dared to vote for it. This 
reveals the most valuable service of 
the Recall. // is not its actual use 
but the knowledge that it can be used. 
zvhich makes officers responsive to the 
public will" 

And on page 438 is this inspiring 
paragraph: 

"To the writer it has seemed ap- 
parent that one of the most inspiring 
movements in human history is now 
in progress — inspiring not on account 
of the splendor of its trappings, but 
because the movement itself is a part 
of the everyday thought of a people 
who are striving to realize the high- 
est co-operative ideals that have been 
developed in centuries past. Nor is 
this the inspiration of a local group 
or sect. A wave of organized demo- 
cracy is sweeping around the world, 



based on a broader intelligence and a 
more enlightened view of civic re- 
sponsibility than has ever before been 
obtained." 



Unpopular Government in the United 
States. By Albert M. Kales, Professor 
of Law in the Northwestern Univers- 
ity. Published by the University of 
Chicago Press. Cloth bound; 263 
pages. Price, $1.50; postage 12 cents. 

This book gives a very clear and 
able presentation of the reasons for 
and the claims of the Short Ballot. 
The author also discusses very inter- 
estingly, and with some originality, 
the one and two chambered legisla- 
ture. But he does great injustice to the 
Initiative and Referendum by treat- 
ing them from an entirely theoreti- 
cal point of view, ignoring the large 
fund of facts now available, developed 
by experience with these instruments 
of popular control of pubile affairs. 
From pure theory, he concludes that 
what he calls "the power of extra-legal 
government" would use these instru- 
ments as effectively as they now use 
the mazes of the long ballot. In prac- 
tise, this theory has never worked 
out. The "extra-legal" powers seek 
private arrangement behind closed 
doors, where not only the "slate" of 
the long ballot is arranged, but many 
other things beside. The Initiative 
and Referendum are not, and cannot 
be, arranged in this way. The author 
claims that placing propositions on 
the ballot by means of the Initiative 
and Referendum "adds more burdens 
to the already greatly overloaded vot- 
er." (Page 120). 

But this burden is entirely different 
from the burden which the author 
very clearly expresses on pages 21 
and 22 as follows: "The task of the 
voter to obtain sufficient information 
about candidates long ago passed be- 
yond what even the very intelligent 
citizen could fulfil and still maintain 
his place in competitive industry-" 



130 Equity 

And the task of getting sufficient and 
reliable information concerning num- 
erous candidates has peculiar difficul- 
ties. 

Not so concerning propositions plac- 
ed upon the ballot. The intelligent 
voter already knows about these, and 
his sentiments concerning them. And 
the official pamphlet gives every voter 
the opportunity to deliberately en- 
lighten himself from official and non- 
partizan sources concerning the mea- 
sures submitted. Not so with the 
long ballot of candidates. The ideal 
is, the Short Ballot for candidates, and 
for measures submitted the ballot 
should be as long as the voters wish 
to make it. This plan relieves the 
voters from the difficult mazes of the 
long ballot of candidates, breaks par- 
tizan power, and is highly developing 
to the electorate. 

The author presents the same ar- 
gument (too much voting) against 
the Recall, and the same claim that 
the "extra-legal government" can and 
will use this instrument. The only 
instance of this that we can recall is 
the threatened or attempted Recall 
of Judge Ben B. Lindsey, of Denver. 
Their experience in this instance will 
not encourage these malignant forces 
to repeat the effort. The Recall has 
proven to be a people's instrument. 



The March of 
Popular Government 



Politics in petitions? Without a 
doubt. The possession of final con- 
trol of your town or state or national 
government through this process of 
signing a petition for the submission 
of certain definite propositions does 
not make you less a human being. 
But the rivalry of different leaders, 
for signers to their good, bad or in- 
different, respective petitions cannot 
fail to produce a far more healthy 
politics than existed under the system 
of blind obedience to party bosses. 



California. 

If any person has doubts about the 
educational value of the Initiative 
and Referendum to the voters of a 
state, let him go into California at 
any point or any time between now 
and the next general election in No- 
vember of this year. It is a perfectly 
safe guess that he will find pretty 
much everybody discussing one or 
another of the several important 
measures that are to be voted on. 
Some of these were mentioned in our 
report for the April Equity (page 
86). In the press and on the stump 
and in private conversation every- 
where the pros and cons of prohibi- 
tion, the universal 8-hour day. aboli- 
tion of the death penalty, red light 
abatement and others were already 
causing a big stir. 

But since then still another issue 
of widespread interest to the people 
of the state has been brought before 
the electorate by Initiative petition. 
It is the proposed amendment provid- 
ing for home rule as to taxation under 
which all improvements on land and 
all personal property would be ex- 
empted from taxation. Another mea- 
sure, which is fathered by the Cali- 
fornia Land Settlement League, 
would authorize county supervisors 
to lease to actual settlers state or 
county lands in tracts not to exceed 
20 acres to a family, and, when deem- 
ed necessary, to build for each fam- 
ily a house costing not over $200 which 
tenant may pay back in seven years. 
First choice in the allotment would 
be given to citizens of California, 
second choice to those of other states 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



131 



and third choice to aliens eligible to 
citizenship. 

Los Angeles has voted a $6,000,000 
bond issue with which to build a plant 
to develop power from the city's 
$26,000,000 aqueduct. It is proposed 
to take over the existing light and 
power properties at a valuation to be 
fixed by the State Railroad Commis- 
sion. At present rates these prop- 
erties would pay the city a net profit 
of $1,200,000 a year. 

"The increasing difficulty of fooling 
the American people has been illus- 
trated once and again in the same 
week in Los Angeles City and Coun- 
ty, the past month," writes Dr. John 
R. Haynes, of that city. 

"On May, the 5th, a Recall election 
was held in the case of Richard Nor- 
ton, member of the County Board of 
Supervisors, who had rendered him- 
self obnoxious to the old political ma- 
chine and Big Business by his vigor 
in blocking designs upon the public 
treasury and his strong support of 
the merit system in the County Civil 
Service. This was the third recall 
election held in Los Angeles County; 
the first one being the first use of the 
recall provision, so far as could be as- 
certained in the world. In the prev- 
ious two cases the officials were clear- 
ly unfit and the people so decided. 
In this last case of Richard Norton 
the attack was made upon him as evil 
doers attack a faithful watchdog, be- 
cause of his fidelity. The people, 
however, could not be fooled or con- 
fused by extraneous issues raised to 
becloud the real issue and showed by 
their vote conclusively that the recall 
weapon cannot be used for the pur- 
pose of wronging a faithful official. 
For Norton and against the recall 
there were cast 10,478 votes as 
against 4,710 votes cast for the re- 
call and for his four opponents com- 
bined. 



"The second election held three days 
later, May 8th, was in the city prop- 
er, to determine whether the city 
should bond itself for $6,500,000 to 
complete its electric power plant and 
distribution system in connection 
with its Owens River aqueduct just 
completed, which brings mountain 
water 250 miles to the city. The 
private power and lighting companies 
now monopolizing these services 
spent hundreds of thousands of dol- 
lars and used their thousands of em- 
ployees for months prior to the elec- 
tion in the effort to fool the people 
by raising the bogy of high taxation 
and by the lavish dissemination of 
falsehoods; but the people freed 
themselves from the tyranny of this 
privately owned utility by approving 
the bonds by vote of 56,183 to 
23,164." 

Colorado. 

From our distinguished editorial 
counsellor, Judge Lindsey, we learn 
that the movement to reorganize the 
state government of Colorado (men- 
tioned in April Equity, — page 87), 
on the basis of a one-chambered legis- 
lature chosen by proportional rep- 
resentation and a governor elected 
with the short ballot is not to be 
pressed at the coming election, though 
it is not to be delayed long. Atten- 
tion to be directed first to several 
other matters as being more immedi- 
ately urgent. 

A campaign has been started under 
the direction of the Colorado Social 
Service League, of which Judge Lind- 
sey is the president and Mr. George 
Eisler the secretary, for four mea- 
sures which the legislature has re- 
peatedly refused to enact in spite of 
great popular demand and which are 
expected to save the state hundreds 
of thousands of dollars. 

One is an amendment to the con- 



132 



stitution adding to the people's power 
under the Initiative and Referndum 
so as to permit the people upon de- 
mand of 25 per cent of the qualified 
electors, to have initiated and refer- 
red measures voted upon at a special 
election, when nothing else shall be 
considered. Petitions for this pur- 
pose would be addressed to the gov- 
ernor. Also the governor is to have 
power conferred to call special elec- 
tions at which measures may be sub- 
mitted to the voters. The date of 
such special elections must be at least 
four months in advance of a general 
election date. Six months before said 
special election the governor must 
make public proclamation thereof and 
of its purpose. In submitting mea- 
sures at these special elections the 
process shall be as now directed in 
the Initiative and Referendum provis- 
ions of the state constitution and laws. 

Speaking of this proposed amend- 
ment, Secretary Eisler says the main 
object is to have important measures 
voted on at a special election "free 
from the confusion, bitterness and 
difficulties of a political campaign in 
our state, in which about 500 people, 
more or less, are running for office, 
and when people can pay but little 
attention to initiated measures." 

The other measures proposed are 
bills as follows: To provide for a 
child welfare commission to codify the 
laws relating to women and children; 

To amend the existing jury system 
so as to permit verdicts in civil cases 
by three-fourths vote of juries and 
permitting women to sit on juries; 

To permit a term of probation to 
adult first offenders so as to compel 
men to support themselves and fam- 
ilies rather than to be a burden on the 
state with their families in want. 

In order to initiate these measures 
each must be petitioned by not less 



Equity 

than 25,000 voters before July 1, as 
the constitution requires that peti- 
tions for legislation or amendment 
shall be filed with the signatures of 
8 per cent of the legal voters "at least 
four months before the election at 
which they are to be voted on." 

The purpose of the Colorado Social 
Service League, as stated in its ar- 
ticles of incorporation is as follows: 
"To take advantage of the Initiative, 
Referendum and Recall provisions of 
the constitution of Colorado in fur- 
thering measures for the social, eco- 
nomic, industrial and political welfare 
of the state of Colorado, especially 
with reference to the welfare of work- 
ing men, women and children; to or- 
ganize and conduct a state-wide 
campaign in the interest of the prin- 
ciples and instrumentalities of mod- 
ern democracy, etc." 



Delaware. 

Wilmington, the principal city of 
Delaware, with a population of al- 
most 100,000, is about ready to join 
the ranks of those progressive munic- 
ipalities having the commission or 
city manager form of government 
made responsive to the popular will 
by a good, practical provision for 
the Initiative and Referendum. We are 
prepared to risk our reputation as a 
political prophet on that statement. 

A commission charter containing 
these vital provisions, along with the 
other approved processes of govern- 
ment by a small body of elected com- 
missioners, has been drawn by the 
Wilmington Civic Association, of 
which Mr. Irving Warner is presid- 
ent and Mr. Norman E. John secre- 
tary and treasurer, to be presented to 
the next state legislature for submis- 
sion to the voters of Wilmington. 
A representative of Equity has 
had the privilege of advising with 



The Initiative, Referenda 

this association in regard to the Ini- 
tiative and Referendum features of 
the proposed charter and it is an 
open secret in Wilmington that these 
important features have won the ap- 
proval of the Referendum League of 
Delaware. Without that approval it is 
extremely doubtful if any charter 
could obtain a majority of affirmative 
votes in that city, for it is not for- 
gotten how the charter submitted for 
Wilmington by the legislature was 
snowed under, 7 to 1, simply be- 
cause it did not contain the Initiative 
and Referendum. 

The Referendum League and the 
labor unions made a hot campaign 
against that charter solely on the 
omission of the I. and R. 

The Initiative is made operative on 
the signing of a petition by 25 per 
cent of the voters at a special elec- 
tion, unless passed without alteration 
by the commissioners; or at the next 
general city election if signed by not 
less than ten per cent of the voters. 
The decision is to be rendered by a 
majority of the electors voting on the 
proposed ordinance. The pamphlet 
system of publicity for proposed or- 
dinances is included in the plan, with 
signed arguments for and against 
measures to be mailed to all the 
voters. 

The Referendum is made operative 
as to measures passed by the com- 
missioners if within fourteen days 
after passage a petition is signed by 
5 per cent of the electors as shown 
by the last general city election. 
That is, such petition serves to sus- 
pend the operation of the proposed 
ordinance for 30 days from date of 
passage. If during this period there 
be added 10 per cent of signatures to 
the petition, making a total of 15 per 
cent, the measure must be submitted, 
either at the general election or at 



m and Recall Department 



133 



a special election, to the voters unless 
the commissioners themselves repeal 
it. Measures affecting the public 
health or safety and regarded as 
emergencies are excepted from the 
Referendum by the declaration to 
such effect in the preamble and pass- 
ed by a three-fourths majority on a 
separate vote. 

Idaho. 

The day of deliverance for fair 
Idaho is at hand when the finger of 
scorn may no longer be pointed at 
her as the horrible example of a state 
having the form and name of popular 
government but lacking the sub- 
stance. Since November of 1912 
amendments to the constitution of 
the state authorizing the Initiative 
and Referendum have been duly in 
effect so that Idaho has been listed 
in the reference books as the posses- 
sor — we forbear to say, the proud 
possessor — of those great instrumen- 
talities of democratic self govern- 
ment. Go into any good law library 
and you will find these amendments 
neatly printed and tucked away in 
the massive tomes of the Idaho Ses- 
sions Laws for 1913 as "Amendments 
15 and 16." And they do declare 
with solemn verity that "the people 
reserve to themselves the power to 
propose laws and enact the same at 
the polls independent of the legisla- 
ture," also "the power to approve or 
reject at the polls any act or measure 
passed by the legislature." But as 
the inquirer peruses these documents 
a line further his face may be ex- 
pected to break into a smile as he 
mutters, "Oh, I see — the joker" 

What he reads is that the legal 
voters may exercise these splendid 
powers "under such conditions and 
in such manner as may be provided 
by acts of the legislature," and that 
a measure thus submitted at a gen- 



134 



Equity 



eral election shall be enacted if a 
majority of the vote cast for governor 
approves. In the first place the 
legislature of Idaho, with its member- 
ship still carefully hand-picked by 
the reactionary interests in control of 
the bi-partisan machine, has remain- 
ed strangely oblivious to its privilege 
of enacting an enabling statute for 
these magnificent powers reserved to 
the dear people. But in the second 
place, it would have been of little 
value to the people if such an act had 
been passed, with the manifestly un- 
fair requirement as to the vote neces- 
sary to a decision. 

Now all this nonsense is to give 
way before the oncoming wave of an 
aroused public intelligence under the 
guidance of fearless and conscientious 
leaders who know what the people 
are really entitled to. The legisla- 
ture of Idaho, which meets in January 
next will have before it a real, self- 
executing Initiative and Referendum 
amendment to the constutition which 
has been carefully prepared under the 
criticism of experts and with an or- 
ganized body of public opinion back 
of it such that the legislators will 
hardly dare to refuse to let it go to 
the people for adoption. This amend- 
ment, a draft of which has been sub- 
mitted to the editor of Equity for 
comment, has now been approved by 
the state labor bodies, the Grange and 
by the Socialist and Progressive 
leaders. It has the support of the 
Boise Capitol News and other Pro- 
gressive papers. 

The main features of this proposed 
amendment may be briefly outlined 
as follows: Ninety days to intervene 
before any bill or resolution of the 
legislature may go into effect unless 
declared an emergency in a separate 
vote by a three-fourths majority of 
each house. The Initiative petition 



shall state whether the proposed mea- 
sure is to be referred to the legisla- 
ture or to the people. If 5,000 or 
more voters sign a petition for a law 
or an amendment to the constitution 
and asks that it be submitted to the 
legislature, that shall be done, the 
decision at the polls to be rendered 
by "a majority of those voting there- 
on." But a petition signed by only 
3,000 voters will require the legis- 
lature to act on a proposed measure. 
If rejected it may still be submitted 
to a vote at the polls on demand of 
2,000 additional signers. At the same 
time the legislature may pass an 
alternative measure which may be so 
designated on the -ballot. Initiated 
measures passed do not require the 
signature of the governor and the 
executive is not to have the veto 
power, but he may require them to be 
submitted to the voters at the next 
general election. 

Within ninety days after adjourn- 
ment of the legislature a petition 
signed by not less than 3,000 voters 
will serve to order a Referendum on 
any measure passed during the ses- 
sion or part thereof. If 10,000 or 
more voters sign an Initiative or Ref- 
erendum petition for a special elec- 
tion the governor shall order such 
election on a day not less than sixty 
nor more than ninety days distant. 
This applies to emergency measures 
as well as others. Also the legisla- 
ture is given the power to order a 
special election by a majority yea 
and nay vote. Any measure sub- 
mitted to the voters, if approved, 
shall go into effect in thirty days, 
and if not approved it shall not be 
again submitted for three years ex- 
cept on demand of a three-fourths 
majority of both branches of the 
legislature or not less than 20,000 
signatures to a petition. Any mea- 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



135 



sure adopted by popular vote may not 
be amended or repealed by the legis- 
lature except by a three-fourths ma- 
jority of both branches with approval 
of the governor, nor shall any state 
court have power to declare such law 
to be unconstitutional. 

The full text of all measures sub- 
mitted to the voters must be printed 
in pamphlet form, the sponsors to 
have the pamphlet printed with com- 
ments thereon and distributed by the 
secretary of the state to the voters, 
depositing a bond to cover the cost. 
But if the vote goes largely against 
the measure the state is to pay the 
cost. 

The secretary of state is made the 
judge of the sufficiency of any peti- 
tion and in the event of an injunction, 
the burden of proof is placed on the 
enjoiners. False signing of a petition 
is duly warned against as a felony 
on the petition forms. 

Indiana. 

Hoosierdom is waking up at last 
to the fact that its constitution is a 
barrier to real progress and a weapon 
in the hands of the reactionaries and 
standpatters. The proposal to have 
the old document sent into drydock 
for repairs, which is to be submitted 
to the voters at the November elec- 
tion, has aroused a tremendous amount 
of discussion throughout the state 
and this is but a beginning. At least 
one political party has declared for 
tht Initiative and Referendum as an 
essential feature of the revision and 
the State University is taking an ac- 
tive part in the campaign. 

At Bloomington on June 8, 9 and 
10, a Conference on the Question 
"Shall a Constitutional Convention be 
Called in Indiana?" was held under 
the auspices of the Indiana Univer- 



sity Extension Division, the record of 
which is to be published and widely 
disseminated. Prof. James A. Wood- 
burn, of the History and Political Sci- 
ence Department, led off with a high- 
ly instructive review of "Constitu- 
tion-Making in Indiana." Herbert S. 
Bigelow, who was president of the 
Ohio Constitutional Convention of 
two years ago, was present and 
testified eloquently to the educational 
value of a constitutional convention. 
Various defects of the present con- 
stitution were discussed — as to tax- 
ation, by Fred A. Sims of Frankford, 
Ind.; as to suffrage by Hon. J. P. 
Dunn and Dr. Amelia Kellar of In- 
dianapolis; and as to provisions for 
local government, by Theodore F. 
Thieme of Fort Wayne and Oswald 
Ryan of Anderson. Other limita- 
tions discussed were provisions for 
legislative process and the judiciary 
in its relation to legislative power. 
H. S. Gilbertson came on from New 
York to address the conference on 
the Short Ballot and Former Senator 
Beveridge spoke to a big audience 
with great force of "The I. R. and R. 
as Marks of a Democratic Constitu- 
tion." 

The state convention of the Pro- 
gressive Party has adopted a plat- 
form containing the demand for the 
Initiative and Referendum as to all 
matters of legislation and the Recall 
as applied to all executive and admin- 
istrative offices; also for the Short 
Ballot, Home Rule for Cities, separ- 
ation of the judiciary from politics 
and election of candidates for office 
without the party emblem; for a 
constitutional convention; trial by 
jury for indirect contempt of court; 
all good labor legislation and the sub- 
mission of suffrage and prohibition 
to the voters. 



136 



Equity 



Louisiana. 



The yeast of ideas is working down 
in Louisiana, though as yet little 
actual progress has been made to- 
ward popular control of legislation. 
In the session of the legislature still 
meeting, as we write, a favorable 
committee report was made on a 
resolution providing for a constitu- 
tional convention. But it failed to 
receive the approval of the Democra- 
tic machine leaders and it was voted 
down by a large majority. 

Senator George Wesley Smith 
brought forward in the Senate an 
amendment providing for the crea- 
tion of a new form of state govern- 
ment to consist of a one-chambered 
board of eight directors (one for each 
congressional district), which body 
would have all the powers of the 
present general assembly, each direct- 
or to receive a salary of $5,000 a year 
and be required to give his whole 
time to the work. Nothing is said in 
the report available as to whether the 
plan included provision for the I. and 
R. as a check on the great powers of 
so small a body, but it goes without 
saying that the people would never 
accept such a scheme without that 
control. 

Maryland. 

As yet little has been heard of the 
campaign in Maryland for the pend- 
ing amendments to the constitution, 
among which is the one providing 
for the Referendum (noted on page 89 
of April Equity). Tentative steps 
have been taken by those who have 
fostered the Referendum legislation, 
toward the formation of a state or- 
ganization with branches in various 
sections to carry on the work this 
summer and fall. The decision of the 
electorate will be rendered by a ma- 



jority of those voting on the proposi- 
tion, under the Maryland constitution, 
and this makes probable its ratifica- 
tion. 

As yet there is no sign of an or- 
ganized opposition. 

The main points of the amendment 
for the Referendum, as passed, are as 
follows: Applies to all bills except 
those that are declared emergencies 
by a three-fifths majority of both 
houses; makes the repeal of a law 
effective by the majority of the elect- 
ors voting thereon; the petition for 
any referendum on a measure to be 
signed by 10,000 qualified voters of 
whom not over half may be residents 
of Baltimore; but any public local 
law affecting one county or the city 
of Baltimore may be submitted to 
the voters thereof on the petition of 
ten per cent of the electorate of said 
county or the city of Baltimore. 

Massachusetts. 

On June 25 the lower house of the 
Massachusetts legislature voted, 141 
to 85, in favor of the resolve for the 
submission of a constitutional amend- 
ment providing for the use of the 
Initiative and Referendum by the 
electorate of the state — all of the 
Democrats except two and the Pro- 
gressives voting for the resolution, 
in conformity to their respective 
party pledges, the Republicans 
against it. Nevertheless, under the 
rule requiring a two-thirds majority 
to merely let the people have their 
say, yes or no, on an amendment to 
the constitution, this measure went 
down to defeat. 

With certain amendments of the 
original resolution, this amendment 
for the I. and R. had been reported 
from committee favorably for the first 
time in the history of the state on 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



137 



June 10 and its prospects for passage 
were good. One amendment raised 
from 25,000 to 50,000 the number of 
signatures necessary to initiate a 
constitutional amendment and raised 
from 10,000 to 15,000 the number of 
signatures required to Initiate a bill 
or resolution. Also it was provided 
that an amendment or an act once 
submitted to the voters should not 
be again submitted for three years; 
also that not more than 25 per cent 
of the signatures on any petition 
might be from any one county. 

One of the distinctive features of 
the amendment was the provision for 
initiative petitions. It required that 
such a petition be signed in the first 
instance by five voters to be known 
as the proposers. Upon its being 
filed with the secretary of state, that 
official was to provide blanks for fur- 
ther signatures at the expense of the 
proposers. When the required num- 
ber of signatures should be obtained, 
the petition would be submitted to 
the legislature. While pending there, 
the proposers would have power, by 
their unanimous vote, to approve 
amendments offered in either branch, 
the votes to be recorded in writing. 
In case the proposed measure were 
rejected by the legislature, and within 
thirty days 5,000 additional signa- 
tures were obtained, then the secre- 
tary of state would have to submit 
the measure to the supreme court 
for an opinion as to its constitution- 
ality. If it were found constitutional, 
then the measure would be submitted 
to the voters at the next state elec- 
tion. 

When the I. and R. amendment 
came before the House an attempt 
was made by motion of the Republi- 
can floor leader, Cox of Boston, whose 
advocacy of the measure in principle 
had been announced with a great 



flourish several months ago, to make 
it virtually inoperative by having it 
provided that the signatures be made 
in the office of the town or city clerk. 
He spoke of the signature chaser as 
an evil and undemocratic. Leader 
McLeary of the Democrats charged 
Cox with trying to kill the measure 
by subterfuge. 

On June 2, by the vote of 106 to 90, 
the House rejected the bill providing 
for a constitutional convention, which 
had been strongly advocated by Gov- 
ernor Walsh and had been urged in 
the Democratic and Progressive plat- 
forms. This failure was due to the 
absense of three Democrats and the 
silence of nine others, also to the ab- 
sense or silence of several of the Pro- 
gressives. Leader Cox, in explaining 
his vote against the measure, said 
there were several important amend- 
ments already up for consideration 
and that the press of the state was 
against a convention. Two of the 
amendments have been approved for 
submission to the voters, namely for 
woman suffrage and to authorize the 
taking of land by the state to wipe 
out slums and provide homesteads. 

Prior to this the Senate had killed 
the proposal to hold state elections 
only once in two years, instead of 
annually. 

At least two Massachusetts cities, 
Westfield and Attleboro, have been 
authorized to adopt the commission 
form of government with Initiative 
and Referendum features. 

Mississippi. 

Already the campaign for the I. 
and R. amendment, which the last 
legislature voted to submit to the 
voters of Mississippi at the next 
general election (for details of which 
see page 92 of April Equity), is 
under way, mainly through the efforts 



138 



Equity 



of the People's Rule League, organiz- 
ed by leading friends of the amend- 
ment at the close of the session, with 
the assistance of Executive Secre- 
tary Judson King of the Popular 
Government League. 

Representative N. A. Mott, who 
fathered the amendment and was 
made secretary of this league, writes 
Equity that they have begun a reg- 
ular newspaper campaign. As the 
editor of the Yazoo City Herald he 
has a keen appreciation of the value 
of newspaper publicity in such work 
as this. He says that "most of the 
newspapers of the state are willing to 
publish our articles and have publish- 
ed everything I have sent them so 
far:" That does look encouraging, 
especially in view of the articles 
which we have seen. One in partic- 
ular is worthy of commendation and 
note and is being copied in papers 
throughout the South. It contains a 
very brief and simple definition of the 
terms "Initiative" and "Referendum" 
and an explanation of their import- 
ance to the people. For the benefit 
of our I. and R. workers in other 
states, we quote here the text of this 
editorial, as follows: 

The terms "initiative" and "refer- 
endum" are much misunderstood, and 
but few even of their advocates un- 
derstand their ifar-Veaching power. 
They are not meaningless terms; 
they represent definite principles of 
government which any child can read- 
ily understand when properly ex- 
plained. 

The "initiative" gives the people 
the right to make their own laws. 
It does not change our present form 
of representative government in the 
least. If the proposed constitutional 
amendment is adopted, the members 
of the Legislature will continue to 
be elected, and the Legislature will 
continue to meet in Jackson every 
two years. 

What, then, is the value of the 
initiative to the people? Simply 



this — if the Legislature fails through 
either neglect or refusal to pass any 
measure that the people want, the 
people themselves can petition for an 
election on that measure, and if a 
majority vote for it then such meas- 
ure becomes a law at once. The 
Governor cannot veto it, nor can the 
Legislature repeal it. 

The "referendum" gives the people 
the right to repeal any law or part 
of a law which the Legislature may 
have passed. Should the Legislature 
pass any law that the people do not 
want, they can petition for an elec- 
tion on such law, and if the majority 
vote against it, the law is at once 
repealed. The Governor has no 
power to veto it nor can the Legis- 
lature re-adopt it. 

This is very simple. Anyone can 
easily understand the use of these 
measures, and the only difficulty 
heretofore has been that their oppo- 
nents have purposely muddied the 
waters so that they could not be 
clearly understood. 

Why are these measures so very 
important to the people? First, they 
place the final decision in the mak- 
ing of laws where it properly be- 
longs, in the hands of the people 
themselves. Second, they make the 
legislators more careful in the pass- 
age or repealing of laws, in the 
handling of the people's money, and 
in the granting of franchises and 
special privileges. Third, there will 
be less lobbying and less use of 
money and booze in influencing legis- 
lation, because the lobbyists and 
those behind them know very well 
that their work on the Legislature 
may be overturned by the people. 

The lobbyists and special privilege 
interests know full well the power 
of the initiative and referendum, and 
hence their frantic efforts to defeat 
them. 

Mr. Mott says that in addition to 
the newspaper campaign, the league 
is making plans for a number of pub- 
lic meetings in every county, which 
are to be addressed by the best local 
men and by such speakers of national 
reputation as can be induced to come. 
But for this work they are greatly 
in need of funds and all who are able 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



139 



to do so are urged to send in their 
contributions of cash, making out 
checks to N. A. Mott as secretary 
and treasurer of the People's Rule 
League and mailing them to him at 
Yazoo City, Miss. This fight is of the 
utmost importance to the whole na- 
tional I. and R. movement, first be- 
cause the proposed amendment is in 
nearly all respects a good one, and, 
second, because its adoption by Mis- 
sissippi is certain to operate as a sort 
of wedge into the South. As Mr. Mott 
writes, "If Mississippi wins, many 
other Southern States will fall into 
line." 

Missouri. 

Will the people of this great and 
prosperous state vote next Novem- 
ber that they cannot trust themselves 
in the use of the Initiative, as now 
incorporated along with the Referen- 
dum in the state constitution? The 
question sounds ridiculous on the face 
of it. Yet signs are not wanting 
that the "powers that prey" are seek- 
ing by a clever subterfuge to bring 
the voters blindly to that decision. 

The subterfuge is contained in a 
proposed amendment to the constitu- 
tion which the legislature was pre- 
vailed upon to submit soon after the 
defeat of the tax-reform amendment 
of 1912 by over 400,000 votes but 
which was heralded over the state 
as a Single Tax measure aimed at the 
confiscation of the farmers' land. 

The proposed amendment would 
prohibit the use of the Initiative or 
Referendum on any measure affect- 
ing taxation. It provides that Initi- 
ative petitions signed in each county 
must be filed with the clerk of the 
court four months before election 
and that the clerk must present them 
to the court within thirty days there- 



after, the court to decide if the sig- 
natures are genuine. 

It is perfectly apparent that under 
this provision a hostile clerk could 
hold back the petitions thirty days 
and so make it impossible for a court 
to examine them in time to file with 
the secretary of state three months 
before election. Also a hostile court 
could delay verification by the finding 
of a single false signature. Thus the 
whole machinery of the Initiative and 
Referendum would be placed in the 
power of a set of local officials and 
courts. 

Further, this amendment not only 
prohibits the resubmission of any de- 
feated measure for five years but also 
it provides that the Initiative may 
never be used to change these provi- 
sions in the constitution, thus placing 
them permanently beyond the reach 
of the people. 

Dr. William Preston Hill of St. 
Louis, who was a prominent leader 
in the unsuccessful campaign for the 
so-called Single Tax amendment, is 
now taking an active part with all 
friends of the Initiative and Referen- 
dum in arousing the people of Mis- 
souri to the danger of losing the 
whole system of direct control of the 
government through this amendment. 
In the course of a searching analy- 
sis of the whole situation, which is 
to be used as a campaign document, 
Dr. Hill says that even if the land 
tax amendment had carried, it would 
not have established the Single Tax 
but merely a system of taxation in 
force in Canada and other parts of 
the world, without the slightest di- 
munition in or confiscation of land 
values. But even if it were admitted 
to have been a bad measure, Dr. Hill 
points out how the voters demonstra- 
ted their capacity for self govern- 
ment by voting it down almost un- 



140 

animously. And therefore he asks: 

"But in any case why should the 
Initiative and Referendum be de- 
stroyed because an amendment was 
submitted under it that the people 
did not like? Our legislatures have 
made mistakes of a similar nature 
many times, also serious mistakes 
which the people have had no chance 
to correct and yet nobody has urged 
that as a reason for abolishing the 
legislature. At least, if a mistake 
was made under the Initiative, the 
people immediately had the chance 
to rectify the mistake by a record 
breaking majority at the polls." 

Another effect of the proposed 
amendment, as Dr. Hill points out, 
would be to make impossible any al- 
teration or improvement in the ex- 
isting tax system of Missouri, where 
the general property tax has been 
denounced by all investigators and 
economists. 

Former Governor Folk of Missouri 
says of the proposed amendment: 
"If we tie our hands from voting on 
something we do not want now, we 
will find ourselves powerless some 
day to secure something we do want." 
And that appears to sum up the 
situation presented to the voters of 
Missouri. Everty friend of popular 
government should lend a hand in de- 
feating the proposed amendment. 

But this is not the only measure 
which the electorate of Missouri will 
have to deal with at the polls this 
fall. The county unit law was re- 
ferred to the people by Referendum 
petition; also the St. Louis home rule, 
police and excise laws; the proposed 
constitutional amendment for 10 per 
cent tax for road building; the full 
crew law; to authorize Kansas City 
and St. Louis to borrow more for 
subways and to enable the former to 
buy its public utilities. Besides these 
measures, a petition has been filed 
for the submission of a woman suff- 
rage law. 



Equity 

In view of the variety of questions 
coming before the voters of the state, 
it is interesting to note that the state 
superintendent of public schools has 
decided to take up with the county 
superintendents and school-teachers, at 
this summer's institutes, the matter of 
educating the voters on the questions 
to be submitted. He advocates a vol- 
untary organization to raise money to 
circulate pamphlets containing these 
measures and arguments, pro and con. 
He thus places his finger on one of 
the weak spots in the Missouri I. 
and R. law, namely, its failure to 
provide for any adequate system of 
publicity. But the use of the school 
officials and the teachers and students, 
with the schoolhouses as centers of 
information, is full of possibilities in 
any case and the idea is worth con- 
sideration in other states. 

On June 30 the voters of St. Louis 
adopted by 2,681 majority, the new 
charter, which was drawn up by the 
Board of Freeholders, after an ex- 
haustive study of the whole subject 
and the holding of numerous public 
hearings. This charter contains an 
admirable set of provisions for the 
Initiative and Referendum and for 
the Recall, as well as for the Short 
Ballot, the one-chambered city coun- 
cil and confers on the city govern- 
ment power to lease or acquire any 
public utility. Both the Initiative 
and Referendum sections differ radi- 
cally from those parts of the present 
city charter. The latter requires 15 
per cent of the vote for the mayor 
at the last election, to initiate an 
ordinance at a general election, and 
25 per cent at a special election. In 
the new charter only 5 per cent of 
the registered vote in the last election 
is required to initiate an ordinance 
at a general election and only 7 per 
cent at a special election. Under the 



The Initiative , Referendum and Recall Department 



141 



new plan the amendments to the char- 
ter may be initiated by 10 per cent 
petitions at a general election and 15 
per cent for a special election. Peti- 
tions signed by 2 per cent of the 
registered voters within 30 days after 
the passage of an ordinance, its 
operation shall be suspended for a 
limited time, after which if 7 per 
cent of the voters sign the petitions 
and the board does not repeal it, the 
ordinance must be submitted to a vote 
of the people at the earliest election 
possible. All elective officials are to 
be subject to recall on the basis of 
petitions signed by 20 per cent of the 
registered voters, distributed over 
two-thirds of the wards of the city. 
The decision of the voters in any 
case will be by a majority of the 
cast on the recall proposal. 
No official may be recalled within 
six months after his election, within 
six months before his time expires, 
or within six months after one recall 
proposition has been defeated by the 
people. 

The sentiment of the St. Louis 
public favorable to the Initiative was 
undoubtedly stimulated by the re- 
markable success of the measure 
carried last March, under the present 
charter Initiative, forcing the city 
legislature to go on with the building 
of the free bridge across the Missis- 
sippi. The percentage of signers re- 
quired under that charter is 23 and 
the petitions were signed by over 50 
per cent. 

New Jersey. 

The New Jersey Legislature at its 
recent session passed two measures 
that have been characterized as most 
advanced constructive legislation. 
Both were introduced by State Sen- 
ator Charles O'Connor Hennessy. The 
first of these, the preferential voting 



act, is now in operation, but the sec- 
ond, intended to give home rule to 
municipalities governed by commis- 
sions under the Walsh act, has been 
held up by an appeal to the courts 
on the ground that it is unconstitu- 
tional. The preferential voting law, 
which does away with the primaries 
and permits voters to express their 
first, second, third and other choices, 
has already been put to a practical 
test in three municipalities, Irvington, 
Orange, and Jersey City, where a 
commission was to be elected to fill 
a vacancy caused by resignation. In 
neither Irvington nor Orange did the 
election result in a majority choice. 
Candidates and their friends publicly 
urged all voters to indicate but one 
choice on their ballots, and this ad- 
vice was largely followed, due to the 
fear encouraged that by indicating 
other choices there would be danger 
of invalidating ballots. The outcome 
was unusual in that the leaders in 
the first choice column were the lead- 
ers In the combined vote of all choices. 
An attempt was made to induce a 
if the law in court, but it failed. 
No difficulty was found in the count- 
ing and canvassing of the votes. In 
Jersey City the winner was a Demo- 
crat, Byrne, who received a majority 
and the highest number of first 
choices. 

The home rule act provides that all 
municipalities under commission gov- 
ernment "shall have all powers it 
shall deem necessary or convenient 
for its government, or its prosperity 
not in conflict with the laws appli- 
cable to all cities of this State or the 
provisions of the Constitution." The 
attack on the constitutionality of the 
act was based on the fact that it cre- 
ated a distinct class of municipalities, 
which should "not be subject to any 
laws of this State except laws appli- 



142 



Equity 



cable to all municipalities of this 
State," thus making it special legis- 
lation, which is prohibited by the 
Constitution. The Supreme Court 
declared the act invalid on this 
ground. An appeal has already been 
taken to the Court of Errors and 
Appeals, where it is listed for argu- 
ment at the June term. 

New York. 

At the time this is written it is 
not certain that the constitutional 
convention, decreed by popular vote 
at the special election April 7, 
will be held at all. Not less than 
twenty-five men of New York City, 
in a district dominated by Leader 
Murphy of Tammany, have pleaded 
guilty to the charge of ballot-box 
stuffing in that election and District 
Attorney Whitman has a large num- 
ber of other cases under investiga- 
tion in that and other districts. Six 
of the guilty men were sentenced to 
six months in jail and the others 
were find $100 each. Ground is thus 
furnished for legal action to invali- 
date the convention and several or- 
ganiations are understood to be pre- 
paring to take the matter before the 
courts. 

The recorded majority for the con- 
vention turned out to be much smaller 
than at first reported (at the time 
the April Equity was going to 
press), or to be exact, just 1,353 votes. 
But on the surface all was regular 
and preparations have been made for 
the selection of candidates for mem- 
bership in the convention by the differ- 
ent party organizations. Elsewhere, 
in an editorial for this issue we have 
discussed at some length the argu- 
ments based upon that election and its 
result by enemies of the Initiative 
and Referendum. But for the ballot 



frauds which have been discovered 
and which may invalidate the whole 
proceeding, no right-minded person 
can have any other feeling than that 
of shame and regret. The lesson 
thus taught again to the American 
public is the danger of going on with 
the present system of government 
through party machines operated by 
a bi-partisan leverage of financial 
power resulting in public officers and 
legislatures serving like puppets at 
the end of a string and unchecked by 
any direct method of control or 
supervision by the electorate. 

Through the efforts of the Honest 
Ballot Association and various pros- 
ecuting attorneys, a court order was 
issued requiring boards of election in 
all counties of the state to preserve 
all ballots cast in the April special 
election. This assures a thorough 
investigation of all charges of fraud 
in connection therewith. 

A committee of prominent citizens 
from all parties signed an appeal to 
Governor Glynn urging him to ask 
the legislature at its extra session, 
called on May 4, to amend the laws 
so as to assure the election of non- 
partisan delegates to the constitu- 
tional convention. The governor de- 
cided that he would have to confine 
the session to pressing financial bills 
left over from the regular session, but 
he did write a letter to Chairman 
Osborn of the Democratic State Com- 
mittee asking him to get in touch 
with the heads of the other political 
parties with a view to some agree- 
ment whereby representative lawyers, 
educators, business men and students 
of sociology might be elected to the 
proposed convention, saying that 
"petty partizanship and selfish in- 
terest should not be allowed to enter 
into the remodeling of the New York 
laws." The idea was to have each 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



143 



party committee to select several 
delegates-at-large on whom all par- 
ties would unite. This plan was also 
advocated by the Citizens' Union and 
was taken up favorably by the differ- 
ent state committees of the Repub- 
lican, Democratic and Progressive 
parties. 

The idea of having women repre- 
sented in the convention was brought 
to the attention of the governor and 
the party leaders by a group of prom- 
inent women headed by Cornelia E. 
Bryce, Lillian D. Wald, Frances Kel- 
lor, Mrs. Charles S. Whitman, Mrs. 
Ogden Mills Reid and Mrs. Carrie 
Chapman Catt. Attorney-General 
Carmody gave the opinion that the 
convention itself might judge as to 
the participation of women. He re- 
called the fact that at the last con- 
stitutional convention women dele- 
gates were admitted by a special 
enabling act. Therefore the move- 
ment for naming women to the com- 
ing convention gained headway. 

Both the Republican and Democra- 
tic state committees have definitely 
decided to hold state conventions for 
the formulating of party platforms 
and for the indorsement of delegates- 
at-large to the constitutional conven- 
tion, but not for the naming of candi- 
dates for state office. This last was 
regarded as an important victory for 
the friends of the direct primary in 
all parties. 

Governor Glynn signed the Op- 
tional City Charter bill, which was 
passed at the regular session (See 
on page 96 of the April Equity). 
This goes into effect on July 15 and 
thirty days thereafter any of its 
seven different forms of charters 
may be submitted to a popular vote 
in any city on petition to the city 
council signed by 10 per cent of the 



voters as recorded at the previous 
city election. 

Mayor Mitchel of New York City, 
gave the public of that great metro- 
polis and of the country in general 
a mild shock — especially the conser- 
vative and reactionary elements — by 
remarks he made at Cincinnati on 
June 1 at a dinner of the trustees of 
the Cincinnati University. He was 
quoted as saying that the Charter Re- 
vision Committee of New York, of 
which he is an ex-oVncio member, was 
going to bring forth a new charter 
which would contain the Initiative, 
Referendum and Recall on a workable 
basis. Later he said he had merely 
expressed the belief that the com- 
mission would do that and his own 
unqualified belief in the desirability 
of those instruments. Otherwise his 
remarks were reported fairly as fol- 
lows: 

"I believe that a mayor should hold 
office more than four years, yet I 
believe in giving the people a means 
of constant check upon all officials, 
in the form of a modified recall. The 
new charter will enable us to vote 
without partisanship and without 
national interference. It will include 
a form of ballot by which, we believe, 
the will of the people may be ex- 
pressed. With such a charter in our 
possession we then believe that New 
York City can take its place among 
the progressive cities of the country. 
We do not need the advice of a rural 
legislature, though that is what 
they would thrust upon us. We think 
that New York City understands what 
is needed better than any one else. 
Relief from this domination has been 
promised for many years, but we 
have not yet had it. What we have 
been asking is powers broad enough 
to frame, change or amend the char- 
ter of our city. We have appointed 



144 



a charter revision committee 
its work is finished, we intend to go 
before the legislature and demand 
that relief be given us." 

The reactionary press of New York 
"went up in the air" over this talk 
by the absent mayor and long, solemn 
editorials were rushed into print de- 
ploring his rashness and radicalism. 
But one or two papers approved. 
And now the fight is on. 

North Carolina. 

Reactionary forces still dominate 
the Democratic party of North Caro- 
lina to such an extent that real mea- 
ures of fundamental reform have lit- 
tle show< This statement is fully 
borne out by what happened in the 
State Democratic convention at Ral- 
eigh on June 4 when Governor Craig 
led a successful fight 'against the 
proposal for an I. and R. plank in the 
platform, notwithstanding that a 
Democratic mass-meeting had indors- 
ed the measure. The Progressive 
element was small in number and 
poorly organized. Only one member 
of the platform Committee favored 
the Initiative and Referendum. Even 
the proposal to put in a plank for a 
state wide primary law was voted 
down, 572 to 268, in spite of the fact 
that its advocates cited the names 
of Wilson, Bryan, Daniels and other 
Democratic leaders as being on rec- 
ord for the measure. The primary 
plank, as adopted, applies to only 5 
per cent of the offices of the state. 

But such a black record of reaction 
is not to go unchallenged. Already 
we hear that a number of progres- 
sive Democratic papers are making 
protest and several of the prominent 
Democrats on that side of the fence, 
including Bruce Craven of Trinity, 
A. L. Brooks of Greensboro and P. 
W. Glidewell of Reidsville, are carry- 



Equity 
when ing on an active campaign with a 



view to letting the people know how 
they have been tricked at Raleigh. 
Says Mr. Craven: 

"Nothing can be done until we get 
what Wilson calls 'the means of get- 
ting reform/ The System itself must 
be destroyed before anything can be 
accomplished. We are fighting a 
complete political machine that has 
dominated the state for fourteen 
years and which its masters are using 
for their own selfish purposes. We 
are going to win." 

Ohio. 

Welcome, Columbus, into the com- 
pany of those progressive municipali- 
ties having the commission form of 
government with the Initiative, Ref- 
erendum and Recall attachment! 
The new charter was adopted on May 
5 at a special election for Ohio's 
capital city. We have received the 
following authoritative report of the 
result: 

The Trustees of the Sinking Fund. 
Columbus, Ohio, 
May 13th, 1914. 
Editors of Equity, 

1520 Chestnut St., Phila., Pa. 
Gentlemen: — 

Yours of the 11th instant received. 
I am sending you under separate cov- 
er a copy of the new charter. It 
goes into full effect January 1st, 
1916, at the expiration of the term of 
office for which the present incum- 
bents are elected. The vote stood 
8,514 for and 7,440 against. The total 
registered votes of the city is about 
43,000. The vote was very light, be- 
cause the recent flood has caused 
many of our citizens to lose interest 
in the charter movement. The char- 
ter was bitterly fought by the politi- 
cal organizations, but the* charter re- 
ceived the support of nine out of the 
sixteen wards. 

Very respectfully, 
M. A. Gem under. 






The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



145 



The main features of the new char- 
ter, in addition to the I. R. and R., 
are the council of seven chosen at 
large, in place of the present council 
of 16 chosen by wards; non-partisan 
election of mayor, city attorney and 
auditor on short ballot with provision 
for preferential voting. The charter 
means home rule for Columbus. The 
term of all elective officers is raised 
from two to four years. The office 
of public defender is created for the 
benefit of those accused persons un- 
able to employ a lawyer. The mayor 
may use his veto but not so as to 
block a determined majority, for it 
requires no more to pass a bill over 
the veto than was required for its 
original passage. 

The Initiative is made available on 
the petition of 6 per cent of the regis- 
tered voters of the city, the city 
clerk to pass upon its sufficiency with- 
in ten cays and submit it to the coun- 
cil, and the decision of the voters to 
be made by a majority voting on the 
proposition. 

For the operation of the Referen- 
dum, it is required that a petition, to 
repeal or refer to the people any or- 
dinance within thirty days after pass- 
age, be signed by 12 per cent of the 
voters as registered and the decision, 
if submitted to the voters, to be ren- 
dered by a majority of those voting 
thereon. Bills passed in obedience 
to Initiative petitions are also sub- 
ject to the Referendum. 

A petition for the Recall of an 
elective officer must be signed by at 
least 1,000 voters and must contain 
in 200 words a statement of the 
ground of the recall. After being 
filed with the city clerk notice of 
said petition is to be sent to the of- 
ficials concerned, who may prepare 
their defense in not over 500 words. 



Then the petition, with the defense 
attached, is to be filed and copies for 
signing are to be made available in 
the several fire houses, with public 
notice thereof in the City Bulletin. 
After thirty days if the clerk finds 
that the signatures amount to at 
least 15 per cent of the registered 
voters, the officers named are noti- 
fied of the fact. If they resign within 
five days their vacancies are filled 
in the regular way, but if not then 
notice is given of a recall election for 
their removal in not less than fifty 
days nor more than ninety days. A 
majority of the votes cast shall cause 
the removal of the official to be duly 
lied. 

The Supreme Court of Ohio has 
now made it plain to all that, in the 
regulation of the elections under the 
Initiative and Referendum clause of 
the constitution, final authority is 
d in the Secretary of State. On 
June 27th, the court handed down the 
opinion in the case of the Ohio Equity 
Association against Secretary of 
State Charles H. Graves, in connec- 
tion with his refusal, last year, to ac- 
cept certain petitions against the 
workmen's compensation law. This 
in line with previous decisions of 
the same court concerning the new 
taxation laws and was to the effect 
that "elections belong to the political 
branch of the government and not to 
the judicial and are not of themselves 
of judicial cognizance, but are mat- 
ters for political regulation." Acting 
in the capacity as state supervisor of 
elections, the Secretary of State and 
his deputies are alone vested with 
authority to hear and determine all 
preliminary questions relating to 
public elections and to determine the 
sufficiency and validity of petitions 
filed. His decision is final "unless 
such decision has been fraudulently 



146 



Equity 



or' corruptly made or procured, or un- 
less he has been guilty of an abuse 
of discretion." 

Oklahoma. 

"A new use for the Initiative," is 
the way the newspapers are describ- 
ing the latest item of political news 
from Oklahoma. It is to the effect 
that Attorney-General West, as a can- 
didate for the Democratic governor- 
ship nomination, has prepared for 
initiation, in due legal form, five 
amendments to the state constitution 
that express his idea of the reforms 
most needed. These he is using as 
his platform and will seek an express- 
ion on them at the primaries in 
August. These amendments provide 
for: the reform of the appellate 
courts to expedite business, reduction 
of the legislature to a one-chambered 
body, reduction of the state tax rate, 
a 2 per cent tax on oil production and 
making drunkenness a ground for 
removal from public office. 

Oregon, 

We have received the following let- 
ter, bearing on conditions in Oregon, 
from Dr. Henry W. Coe of Portland, 
who has been one of the Progressive 
leaders in that state and a national 
committeeman for that party, a letter 
which needs no comment: 

Portland, Oregon, May 1, 1914. 
Dr. C. F. Taylor, 

Editor of Equity, 
Philadelphia, Pa., 
Liberty always costs something if 
it is worth any thing, although tyran- 
ny is more expensive. The Initiative 
and Referendum brings before the peo- 
ple some laws which the people will 
not accept and the claim by our ene- 
mies is that this is a needless expense. 
They utterly fail to state that under 
this method, we are able to secure 
laws in the interest of the people 



which the legislature would never 
pass. There is a sense of comfort 
in living with the I. & R. at one's 
side, similar to that of the frontiers- 
man who at night has a well prim- 
ed rifle at his bedside when savages 
are prowling in the neighborhood. 
That it holds the legislature in leash 
has been thoroughly demonstrated 
here in Oregon. This is an extremely 
important element of value in the I. 
& R. 

Regarding the matter of paid peti- 
tioners, that is, solicitors for signers 
to petitions for I. & R. and to get the 
name of a candidate on the ballot, 
there is much to criticize. These pe- 
titions assume to be a direct demand 
of the people for the measure or for 
the man. The patriotism of the pe- 
tition — being a spontaneous demand 
of the people, is made somewhat of 
a joke by our enemies, when each 
signer represents a set cost. But 
before the paid solicitor is abolished, 
let some one devise a better way than 
the present. How can the people 
sign except the petitions are taken to 
them? Who will take the petitions 
around without recompense, if it is 
to take a week or a month to do so? 
The man who would work without day 
wages would doubtless be looking for 
some political preferment and great- 
er reward. It would be for hire in 
either case. Better pay money openly 
than promise office secretly. 

Henry Waldo Coe. 

Pennsylvania. 

The Clark law giving to cities of 
the third class in this state the com- 
mission government, with a difficult 
I. and R. provision, has had its first 
test in the city of Reading. There 
on April 20 the ordinance was pub- 
lished providing for the signing of 
petitions on the question of the pro- 
posed creation of a paid fire depart- 
ment to supercede the volunteer fire 
organization of the city. As the law 
requires the writing of signatures at 
the city clerk's office, some doubt was 
expressed as to whether or not the 
required 20 per cent of the registered 
voters could sign within the stipulat- 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



147 



ed period, from April 27 to May 7. 
Nevertheless by May 2 the required 
number of signatures had been at- 
tached, or 3426, and more were added 
during the remainder of the period. 
The 4,0C0 or more members of the 
volunteer fire organizations made it 
their business to get the signers "on 
the job." This fact must be taken 
into consideration in this successful 
test of the law. 

Upon the certification of the peti- 
tion and in the absense of a repeal of 
the paid department ordinance by the 
commissioners, a special election was 
duly called for June 23, the result of 
which was a vote of 9411 for keeping 
the volunteer fire fighters as against 
1816 for the paid department ordin- 
ance. 

Senator Henry Alden Clark, of Erie, 
who was the author of the law th\is 
tested in Reading, has written us a 
letter expressing his view of the re- 
sult thus far. In it he says: 

"From such information as I 
have received the practical opera- 
tion of the Act is satisfactory. The 
system is considered good. Some 
minor details, it is thought by some, 
should be amended. One thing is 
certain, expedition in the transac- 
tion of municipal business has been 
secured. 

"The question of efficient govern- 
ment is squarely up to the people. 
It is just as essential to have good 
men operating the municipal ma- 
chinery as it is to have the men 
"behind the guns." And this has 
been in the main accomplished and 
I have faith to believe that our 
municipal citizenship will be re- 
sponsive to the demand." 
The platform of the Washington 
party (the Progressives in this state) 
is the only one containing a full- 
fledged demand for the I. R. and R. 
on a definite basis, but the Democratic 
platform has a general sort of de- 
mand for the Initiative and Referen- 



dum "for use in an emergency" and 
"not by destroying the whole repre- 
sentative system." 

The first trial of the state-wide 
primary law aroused considerable 
criticism on the ground that it ap- 
peared to necessitate larger campaign 
funds than the old method, judging 
from the actual sworn statements of 
the candidates. 

Washington. 

Newspapers unfriendly to the I. and 
R. idea of representative government 
under popular direction have been 
busy circulating over the country an 
item about the costliness of the Initi- 
ative to the state of Washington this 
year. One dispatch from Olympia 
widely published says: "Washington 
taxpayers will pay $300,000 next fall 
for the privilege of initiating their 
own laws. This sum is already avail- 
able and another $100,000 may be 
necessary if the present flow of initi- 
ated bills continues." Longand solemn 
editorials, based on this statement, 
have appeared in the conservative 
papers of the east warning against 
the new scheme. 

In view of this fact, we sent a num- 
ber of clippings containing these stor- 
ies about Washington to Senator 
Poindexter and requested his opinion 
of them for the readers of Equity. 
His reply was as follows: 

United States Senate, 

Washington, D. C. 

Mr. Edwin S. Potter, 

Associate Editor of Equity, 

Philadelphia, Pa. 
My dear Mr. Potter: 

I have yours of 30th ultimo with 
clippings enclosed referring to the 
initiative and referendum. I return 
the enclosures herewith, as requested. 
As you can readily see from the 
clippings referred to, in almost every 
instance they are written by persons 



148 



Equity 



manifestly hostile to initiative and 
referendum. 

On the face of the statements it ap- 
pears that the cost to the people of 
Initiative and Referendum is grossly- 
exaggerated. The officials referred to 
are required to perform certain duties 
with reference to poll lists and mail- 
ing documents, are regular officials 
and have to be paid regular salaries 
whether engaged or not. The vote 
upon measures proposed by Initiative 
is taken at the regular election and 
the extra expense of the election 
caused by the Initiative or Referen- 
dum is but a small percentage. 

Of course, there is some expense 
connected with the operation of these 
laws, as there is connected with the 
legislature and with the consideration 
of every measure by the Legislature. 
If the cost of printing, which is sev- 
eral times referred to as an item by 
these writers, is considered an ob- 
stacle, it should be compared also 
with the enormous amount of prac- 
tically useless printing which is done 
in connection with every session of 
the Legislature or of Congress, tens 
of thousands of bills and documents 
being printed sometimes in excessive 
numbers which are of practically no 
use whatever. 

At any rate, the cost, whatever it 
is, falls chiefly upon the owners of 
small estates who bear in every state 
the chief burden of taxation, and 
these are the people who desire to 
have this voice in the making of their 
own laws. The entire field has been 
searched by enemies of direct legisla- 
tion to find instances of unwise ac- 
tions. The same diligence applied to 
the volumes of congressional and 
state legislation will be rewarded by 
finding many acts which can be 
equally criticized. In most instances, 
however, upon investigation — with 
knowledge of conditions, the criti- 
cisms of Initiative and Referendum 
legislation are found to be without 
any good ground. 

There may be, as in the first ad- 
ministration of every new agency of 
government, some embarrassments 
in the application of these new meas- 
ures. Reference is made to the Re- 
call. While in one or two of our ci- 



ties in the state of Washington there 
have been Recall elections, the gener- 
al effect of the same has been most 
salutary and beneficial. In one in- 
stance a mayor was recalled. After 
one or two ineffectual campaigns, he 
was subsequently again elected may- 
or. This is pointed out as indicating 
the absurdity of the Recall. As a 
matter of fact, however, the Recall 
accomplished its object of stopping a 
reign of lawlessness in the city, and 
the mayor, who before his recall was 
allowing the town to run "wide 
open," after his subsequent re-elec- 
tion appointed as chief of police one 
of the leaders among his former op- 
ponents. 

With kind regards, 

Very truly yours, 

Miles Poindexter. 

It may be perfectly true that a 
state, long dominated by a political 
machine, may, in the first exuberance 
of popular enthusiasm over the pos- 
session of the tools with which to set 
itself free, carry its use of the Initia- 
tive to an excess. But that in any 
event would be "a fault of the head 
rather than of the heart" and it would 
correct itself quickly by the choice 
of a legislature that would be more 
responsive to the popular will. And 
all the time the people are gaining 
intelligence through actual experience. 
They are "learning by doing." 

On April 21 another recalled mayor 
in Washington was re-elected. Mayor 
A. V. Fawcett, twice mayor of Taco- 
ma, who was recalled from that office 
three years ago, was elected mayor 
for a third time, by a majority of 
800 over his chief opponent, Rev. C. 
F. W. Stoever. 

The Supreme Court of Washington 
has delivered an opinion bearing on 
the Recall in a case involving the 
charge that the defendant had em- 
ployed the plaintiff to carry out a 
movement for the recall of certain 
officials. The court holds that such a 
secret contract is void as contrary to 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



149 



public policy. We have been unable 
as yet to obtain a copy of this inter- 
esting decision but a quotation from 
it in the press dispatch declares that 
such a private compact "looking to 
the advancement of personal ends by 
the financing of a recall is just as 
inimical to a sound public policy as 
would be the same course of conduct 
when applied to an election itself, or 
as would be a contract to influence 
legislation by a secretly paid lobby." 

Why a "Bill of Rights?" 

Every now and then we get inquir- 
ies from thinkers preparing for State 
Constitution revisions as to the ne- 
cessity or desirability of continuing 
the insertion of the general statement 
of principles known as the "bill of 
rights." The editor of EQUITY has 
repeatedly given it as his opinion 
that a "bill of rights" is unnecessary 
in present-day state constitutions. 

Dr. Taylor was called upon to give 
his reasons for this opinion several 
weeks ago in the fifty words' compass 
of a night-telegraphed letter to one 
inquirer. At this writing Dr. Taylor 
is in Europe and in his absence I am 
going to give the readers of Equity 
that boiled-down statement of the 
matter for the benefit of the consti- 
tution reviser soon to be at work in 
several states. The inquiry was as 
follows: 

Baton Rouge, La., 

April 18, 1914. 
Charles Fremont Taylor. 

1520 Chestnut St., i'hila., Pa. 
Editor, Equity: 

I will thank you to wire me, night 
letter collect, your reasons why "bill 
of rights" should be omitted from 
State Constitutions. 

Henry D. Montgomery. 

In response to this Dr. Taylor sent 
the following night letter: 

"Fundamental rights for all our people 
secured in United States constitution. 
Liberties for public wrenched from kings 



from time to time by bills of rights. No 
occasion for this here and now. State 
constitutions should provide simple mach- 
inery for efficient government. Political 
rights secured long ago. Duty now good 
government.'''' 



A Good Word From Harvard. 

In a letter containing a renewal of 
his subscription, Gordon W. Thayer, 
of the Harvard College Library, 
Cambridge, Mass., has this to say: 

Harvard College Library, 
Cambridge, Mass., Jan. 17, '14. 
Dr. C. F. Taylor, 

1520 Chestnut St., Phila., Pa. 
Dear Sir: 

Enclosed please find fifty cents in 
stamps for the renewal of my sub- 
scription to "Equity," to cover the year 
1914. 

Allow me in this connection to ex- 
press my great admiration for the 
good work "Equity" is doing, and my 
■trong interest in the bulletins it 
publishes of the advance of popular 
nm.-nt through our country. In 
the short time that I have been reading 
"Equity," I have come to value it 
highly." 

Very truly yours, 

Gordon W. Thayer. 
16 Oxford St., Cambridge,. Mass. 

Longer Terms Under the Recall. 

Rev. Thomas C. Hall of the Union 
Theological Seminary, New York 
City, in a letter to the Editor of 
Equity raises the question of the 
possible effect of the Recall on tenure 
of official station. On this point he 
writes: 
Dear Sir: 

May I suggest that if we had a 
proper Recall law we could elect our 
representatives for indefinite periods 
and gain the advantage of long exper- 
ience without danger of usurpation? 
With a "Recall" we could, if we want- 
ed to, elect on "good behaviour" to the 
great advantage of efficiency. 
Tours sincerely, 

Thomas C. Hall. 



150 Equity 

PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION REVIEW. 

Official Organ of the American Proportional Representation League 

Edited by C. G. Hoag, General Secretary of the League, Haverford.. Pa. (June 10th till 
October 1st, Tamworth, N. H.) 
Officers of the League: 
President, William Dudley Foulke. 
Vice-Presidents, Prof. John R. Commons, 
William S. U'Ren, 
Mrs. Louis F. Post. 
Honorary Vice-Presidents, Rt. Hon. Lord Courtney, of Penwith, 
John H. Humphreys, 
Count Goblet d'Aviella, 
Professor E. J. Nanson. 

General Secretary-Treasurer , C. G. Hoag, Haverford, Pa. 
(June 10th till October 1st, Tamworth, N. H). 

Secretary-Treasurer for Canada, Robert Tyson, 20 Harbord Street, Toronto. 

The object of the League is to secure the adoption of proportional representation for the elec- 
tion of state legislatures, city councils, and other deliberative or policy-determining bodies. The 
means advocated is some form of effective ballot suitable for such a purpose, that is, a ballot that 
permits the voter to record his real will in respect to the composition of the deliberative body with- 
out fear of that will's being nullified by any arbitrary system of district lines, primary elections, or 
what not. Of the many plans of proportional representation, tried or suggested, the League sup- 
ports no one exclusively. It favors each in accordance with its practicability for the special appli- 
cation under consideration and with the degree to which it is effective in insuring to each voter's 
will, in respect to the composition of the deliberative body in Question, neither more nor less than 
its just weight. 

The secretaries will be glad to advise correspondents in regard to the application of the gen- 
eral principle of effective voting to the election of any specified deliberative body. 

All persons in sympathy with the object of the League are invited to become members. Annual dues y 
$1.00. Larger subscriptions are needed. 

Notes. the short ballot and proportional rep- 

The following eminent proportion- resentation." 



alists have accepted the invitation 

extended to them jointly by the Lea- The June issue of Representation 

gue's secretaries to serve as honorary (The P. R. Society, London), contain- 

vice-presidents: Rt. Hon. Lord Court- ing much news of the P. R. move- 

ney of Penwith, Chairman of the ment abroad that we have not yet 

Committee of the (British) Propor- been able to secure directly, came to 

tional Representation Society; Mr. our hands just as we were making 

John H. Humphreys, Secretary of the up our copy for this issue. We 

same Society; Count Goblet d' Al- therefore reprint an unusual amount 

viella, Vice-President of the Senate of of the Representation's matter and 

Belgium; and Professor E. J. Nan- express again our deep obligation to 

son of Melbourne, Australia. the British Society and to its able 

and active secretaries. 

The Progressive Party of Indiana, 



assembled in Convention at Indianapo- A well-drawn bill (based on the 
lis on April 18, included in its plat- list system provisions printed on 
form the following sentence, which pages 20-21 of the U. S. Senate Do- 
perhaps expresses as much political cument on Effective Voting) to pro- 
wisdom as ever a party platform ex- vide for the election of delegates to 
pressed in eight words: "We favor the proposed Constitutional Conven- 



Proportional Representation Review 



151 



tion of New York by proportional 
representation was introduced in the 
Assembly of New York by Assembly- 
man Michael Schaap, a Progressive, 
on March 12th. We understand that 
the bill was drawn and introduced at 
the instance of Francis W. Bird, Esq., 
Chairman of the Progressive Party 
for the County of New York and a 
member of this League. The bill is 
No. 1475. 



Here 
Oregon 
provide 



Oregon. 

is the text of the proposed 
constitutional amendment to 
for the election of the state 
legislature at large by the single non- 
transferable vote. 
PROPOSED CONSTITUTIONAL 

AMENDMENT 
Article II of the constitution of Oregon 
shall be, and hereby is amended by insert- 
ing therein, after Section 16 and before 
Section 17, the following section, which 
shall be designated in the constitution as 
Section 16a of Article II. 

ARTICLE II 

Section 16a. Every legal voter may 
vote for any one candidate in the State for 
representative in the Legislative Assembly 
and no more. The voter may write or 
stick on the ballot the name of the candi- 
date he or she votes for when it is not 
printed on the ballot. The sixty candi- 
dates who receive the highest number of 
votes throughout the state shall be thereby 
elected. 

A candidate'' s name shall be printed on 
the official ballot only in the district in 
which he or she resides. Every candidate 
nominated for representative may have not 
more than twenty words printed with his 
or her name on the official ballot giving 
the name of the industrial, commercial 
or political organization or party by 
which the candidate is' nominated, and 
his or her pledges to the people. 

The votes for the election of representa- 
tive in the Legislative Assembly shall be 



counted, canvassed and returned, and cer- 
tificates of election issued, in like manner 
as heretofore in the election of joint rep- 
resentatives from districts of two or more 
counties. 

All provisions of the constitution and 
laws of Oregon in conflict herewith are 
hereby abrogated and repealed in so. far 
as they conflict with this section. This 
section is in all respects self-executing. 

The measure is endorsed by the 
Oregon State Federation of Labor, 
the People's Power League, the Farm- 
ers' Society of Equity, and the offi- 
cials of the State Grange and the 
Farmers' Union. The campaign for 
it is managed by the Bureau of Pro- 
portional Representation, under the di- 
rection of Miss Nettie Mae Rankin, 
1030 East Main St., Portland, Oregon. 

The following paragraphs are from 
a leaflet that is being circulated in 
Oregon in support of the measure. 

"Th*s measure provides that the 
sixty candidates over the state re- 
ceiving the highest vote for repre- 
sentative shall be elected. Any 
one candidate, therefore, receiving 
one-sixtieth of the total vote cast 
is assured of election. 

"It provides that minority, or 
other parties, may, by nominating 
fewer candidates in the several dis- 
tricts, combine their votes by using 
stickers or writing the name of 
their party candidate in any other 
district in the state, thereby obtain- 
ing minority representation. 

"It will eliminate, to a large de- 
gree, the necessity for using the 
initiative and referendum through 
a fair discussion in the legislative 
assembly of minority party mea- 
sures, thereby getting either favor- 
able legislation in that body or pub- 
licity of the merit or demerit of 
the measure, as the case may be. 
It is certain that the way to a short 



152 



initiative ballot is by proportional 
representation in the legislative as- 
sembly. 

"A brief review of the Multno- 
mah Representative District for 
1912 election, working under the 
present law, showing the misrep- 
resentation through waste of votes 
for that year, follows; and what 
applies to Multnomah district ap- 
plies to all districts in the state. 
"The total number of votes cast 
for the 50 candidates was about 
40,000. The Republicans placed 
their "solid 12" in the assembly 
with less than 17,000 votes, while 
the other parties wasted their 22,- 
000 votes because they were not 
allowed to concentrate and conserve 
their votes from over the state on 
their own party nominees. 
"Making an example of Multno- 
mah district, with but 12 candi- 
dates presenting, and allowing no 
waste of votes, each candidate un- 
der this proportional representa- 
tion plan receiving one-twelfth of 
40,000, or 3,300, votes, would be 
elected. At this election the Demo- 
cratic vote was about 9,900; should 
have three members; none elected. 
Progressive vote, about 6,600; 
should have two members; none 
elected. Socialists, more than 
4,000 votes, should have one mem- 
ber; none elected. Prohibition 
vote, about 2,200; not enough to 
elect, but by using stickers in 
Clackamas County or other dis- 
tricts, could add to this number 
and place one member in the as- 
sembly, thus making up the 12 
members from Multnomah district. 
"Now, as shown, the total vote 
for the Democratic, Progressive, 
Socialist, and Prohibition parties, 
with 38 candidates, was more than 
22,000. They were entitled to sev- 



Equity 

en representatives. They got none. 

But the Republican party sent up 

a solid delegation of 12 members 

with less than 17,000 votes — a 

waste of nearly two-thirds of the 

votes of the district." 

*********** 

The system of electing representa- 
tives covered by this proposed Ore- 
gon Amendment, though clearly less 
satisfactory than the list system or 
the schedule system for the reasons 
explained in the U. S. Senate Docu- 
ment on Effective Voting* may be 
counted on, if adopted, to elect a legis- 
lature much more truly representa- 
tive as well as much abler in person- 
nel than the present single-member 
district system. Moreover, it lends 
itself readily to improvement: it can 
easily be changed into the list, the 
schedule, or even the Hare system 
as soon as both its fundamental ad- 
vantages and its undoubted imper- 
fections have become known to the 
people. It is the "single vote in a 
multiple-membered district," as every 
reasonable system of representation, 
that is, of condensation, must be; and 
it requires only the addition of the 
preferential ballot, in connection with 
the principle of the quota, as worked 
out under the list, the schedule, or 
the Hare plan, to become fit to serve 
permanently as the basis of the 
state's government. 
*A copy of this document will be sent 

free to any address bv C. G. Hoag, 

1st, 



Tarn worth, N. H. (After Oct. 
1914, Haverford, PaO 



A New York State P. R. League. 

At the suggestion of Mr. John E. 
Eastmond, 175 St. James Place, 
Brooklyn, the General Secretary of 
the American P. R. League sent to 
all members of the league living in 
New York City and its nearer suburbs 
an invitation to meet at the City 
Club, on June 3rd, to consider the 



Proportional Representation Review 



153 



foundation of a New York State 
League. Eleven persons were present 
at the meeting. A constitution was 
adopted, and a committee of three 
was appointed to prepare for a larger 
meeting early in the Autumn. All 
who are interested in the movement 
should give their names to Mr. East- 
mond, who is a member of the com- 
mittee of three and who is also serv- 
ing as temporary Secretary of the 
new League. 



Ontario. 

In connection with the general elec- 
tions of Ontario, held on June 29th, 
just as this Review was going to 
press, there was circulated a leaflet 
signed by "The Proportional Repre- 
sentation Society, J. Edw. Maybee, 
President; Alan C. Thompson, Secre- 
tary," from which the following pas- 
sages are taken: 

The Conservative party at the last 
election in Ontario polled a total of 
201,200 votes against the Liberals 
158,000, and elected 85 members to 
the Liberals 21, a majority of 64, 
although according to the vote the 
proportion should have been 60 to 
4G, a majority of only 14. 

Not content with this, the Con- 
servative majority in the House 
deliberately set out to cut down 
the Liberal minority by a shameless 
carving up of the County of Bruce, 
so that, instead of three Liberals, 
one only would be returned, and 
they abolished the Liberal seat of 
Monck. 

But bad as this is, the treatment 
of this city is even worse. By a 
system of A and B seats in four 
constituencies, the Conservative 
majority in each is enabled to elect 
2 representatives, and so the Lib- 
eral minority, which in the aggre- 
gate are entitled by their numbers 
to 3 members out of 8, are dis- 
franchised. As a matter of fact, 
one of the defeated Liberal candi- 
dates received more votes than 
three of the Conservatives who 
were elected. 
We do not know whether the organ- 



ization that issued this leaflet is a 
new one or one that flourished years 
ago under that name. But in any 
case we are glad to see proportion- 
alists active in Ontario. 



P. R. and the Irish Home Rule Bill. 

The recent passage by the House 
of Commons of the Irish Home 
Rule Bill, which provides for P. 
R. in the election of the Senate 
of the Irish Parliament (except for 
the first five years, when the Senate 
will be appointed by the Crown) and 
in the election of a considerable part 
of the Irish House, is another long 
step in the unfaltering march of the 
reform around the world. And it 
looks as if this step would shortly 
lead to several more. For already 
there is much talk in Great Britain 
of separate parliaments for Scotland 
and for Wales. And naturally the 
system of representation that is 
thought to be the best for distracted 
Ireland is urged by many also for the 
other "home rule parliaments" if they 
are instituted. It looks as if the 
trial of the system in Ireland might 
lead to its adoption within a 
few years for other home-rule parlia- 
ments in the British Isles and for 
the Imperial Parliament itself. 

As P. R. is applied in the Parlia- 
ment of Ireland ("Home Rule") Act 
not to all the seats of the Irish House 
of Commons, but only to some thirty 
of them, British proportionalists are 
now engaged in an effort to 
have the system extended to all 
the seats. The following resolution 
passed by the P. R. Society at its 
recent annual meeting in London, ex- 
presses the views of British propor- 
tionalists on this point as well as on 
the election of the local parliaments 
proposed for Scotland and Wales. 
"That this meeting earnestly 



154 

presses upon His Majesty's Govern- 
ment and upon Parliament the ur- 
gent necessity of providing for the 
more adequate representation of 
minorities in the proposed Irish 
House of Commons by extending 
the provisions for proportional rep- 
resentation contained in the Gov- 
ernment of Ireland Bill; it further 
directs attention to the importance 
of adopting the proportional sys- 
tem as the electoral basis in all 
local parliaments should such be 
set up under any scheme of devo- 
lution for the United Kingdom." 
In supporting the resolution, which 
was moved by the Rt. Hon. Lord 
Parmoor and seconded by the Rt. 
Hon. Sir Horace Plunkett, Mr. E. T. 
John, M. P., mentioned the fact that 
P. R. was included in the Welsh 
Home Rule Bill introduced by himself 
and his colleagues. 



Annual Meeting of the British P. R. 
Society. 

Adapted from the Account in the 
June Representation. 

A large and enthusiastic gathering 
of supporters of P. R. assembled in 
the Central Hall, Westminster, on 
May 20th for the annual meeting of 
the Proportional Representation So- 
ciety. The increasing size of these 
gatherings is a good indication of 
the growing popularity of the P. R. 
movement. For some years after the 
revival of the Society in 1905 the an- 
nual meetings were held in the draw- 
ing room of the President, Lord Ave- 
bury. As public sympathy grew a 
change had to be made, first to a 
room in the Westminster Palace 
Hotel, then to the Caxton Hall, West- 
minster, and finally to the large and 
commodious chambers of the new 
Central Hall. 

The public proceedings were pre- 



Equity 

ceded by a short business meeting- 
of the members of the Society at 
which Lord Courtney, the Chairman 
of the Executive Committee, presided. 

The general meeting was presided 
over by the Rt. Hon. Earl of Dun- 
raven, K. P., who is one of the Vice- 
Presidents of the Proportional Rep- 
resentation Society of Ireland, and 
whose untiring efforts for a peaceful 
settlement of the Irish difficulties 
made his position in the chair pecu- 
liarly appropriate. He was supported 
on the platform by Lord and Lady 
Courtney of Penwith, Lord Parmoor, 
Mr. W. C. Anderson (Chairman of 
the executive committee of the Labor 
party), Mr. H. J. Mackinder, M. P., 
Sir Horace Plunkett, K. C. V. 0., 
Mr. Aneurin Williams, M. P., Mr. J. 
Fischer Williams, hon. treasurer of 
the Society, Mr. John H. Humphreys, 
secretary, and others. 

Among those who sent letters re- 
gretting non-attendance were the 
Lord Provost of Glasgow, Lord Bal- 
four of Burleigh, the Hon. Geo. 
Fowlds, ex-Minister of Education for 
New Zealand, the Hon. Sir John Mc- 
Call, Agent-General for Tasmania, 
Sir Gilbert Parker, M. P.. Mr. Philip 
Snowden, M. P., and Sir Mark Sykes, 
M. P. A passage in the letter of the 
last-named member of the Society 
deserves reprinting here: "Propor- 
tional representation is no longer an 
idea. If voters are to express their 
wishes, and statesmen are to trans- 
late them into effect, proportional 
representation is the only way out." 

From the address of the Earl of 
Dunraven: "I ask you to consider the 
moral degradation to a man of intelli- 
gence and activity, qualified to vote, 
but to whom a vote is absolutely 
valueless, either because there is no 
candidate for whom he can cast it. or 
even in the rare case where there is 



Proportional Representation Review 



155 



a candidate, because the certainty of 
failure is so great that it is not worth 
a man's while to move two steps from 
his fireside. What inducement is 
there to men to come forward as can- 
didates? You will admit, very lit- 
tle. What is the result upon an 
electorate who know that their votes 
and their efforts cannot produce the 
slightest effect? It destroys their 
sense of responsibility, their sense of 
civic duty. It saps their self-respect as 
capable citizens. It reduces them to a 
condition of political apathy — a very 
bad thing — or to what is worse, sullen 
disrespect for laws in the making of 
which they have no voice." 

In this passage the speaker was 
discussing conditions in Ireland, 
where, under the present system of 
representation by single-member dis- 
tricts, many of the districts are so 
strongly Nationalist that a Unionist 
might as well not bother to vote, and 
where many other districts are so 
strongly Unionist that a Nationalist 
might as well not bother to vote. The 
same situation is found, of course, in 
many parts of Great Britain, notably 
in Wales, and in a large part of Scot- 
land, where Conservatives cannot 
hope to elect a member of Parlia- 
ment. Is it necessary to add that the 
same absurd situation is to be found 
in many parts of the United States? 

The following resolution was pass- 
ed unanimously: — 

"That this meeting declare! that it 
Ifl imperative, in view of the political 
conditions of the day. to amend the 
-electoral system so that all parties 
may be able to obtain representation 
In proportion to their strength, and it 
therefore urges His Majesty's Govern- 
ment to include the principle of pro- 
portional representation in any pro- 
posals for redistribution or constitu- 
tional reform which it may submit to 
the House of Commons." 



Mr. H. J. Mackinder, M. P., 



in 



moving this resolution began by saying 
that in view of all that was happen- 
ing at the present time he felt more 
strongly than ever that the question 
of proportional representation was 
the fundamental question of the pres- 
ent time. The existing system of 
election produced party tyranny ra- 
ther than democratic government, a 
Unionist tyranny in the South-East 
of England — a Liberal tyranny in 
Wales and Scotland. The result de- 
stroyed the national character of par- 
ties. Unionism became the policy of 
a limited area in England plus the 
Protestants of Belfast; Liberalism, on 
the other hand, was the politics of the 
Celtic fringe. P. R., he believed, 
would have a sobering influence on 
party virulence, it would restore a 
national outlook to politics, and con- 
tained within itself the remedy for 
the worst evils of their time. 

Mr. W. C. Anderson, Chairman of 
the Executive Committee of the Labor 
Party, who seconded the resolution, 
said that three-cornered contests were 
going to increase in number, and right- 
ly so, for every party was equally en- 
titled to put forward their principles 
for the endorsement of electors. The 
real remedy was not to ask this or 
that party to stand aside. The real 
remedy was to provide a just electoral 
system. In every country today, ex- 
cept Great Britain, every Labor move- 
ment had declared emphatically for 
P. R. The proportional movement 
had indeed become a world move- 
ment, and the best men in all political 
parties and outside all political par- 
ties were drawing together to see 
that the reform was made effective. 

The first resolution passed by the 
meeting, concerning the Irish Parlia- 
ment and the Parliaments proposed 
for Scotland and for Wales, has been 
quoted in the article above. 



156 



Equity 



The third resolution, which was 
moved by Mr. H. G. Chancellor, M. 
P., and was carried unanimously, was 
as follows : 

"That this meeting directs the at- 
tention of His Majesty's Government 
to the ill-working of the present 
system of electing Municipal Coun- 
cils, and urges His Majesty's Govern- 
ment to grant early facilities for a 
measure enabling a system of pro- 
portional representation to be applied 
to the election of these councils." 



South Africa. 

Adapted from Representation. 
It will be remembered that the use 
of P. R. for the election of the Muni- 
cipal Councils of Johannesburg, Pre- 
toria, and Roodeport-Maraisburg in 
the Transvaal was brought to an 
end by a reactionary decision of the 
Transvaal Provincial Council in 1912. 
A full account of this incident 
and of the indignation it caused 
throughout South Africa is given in 
Representation, No. 27, 1913. That 
decision has now been reversed by 
vote of the Provincial Council. If, 
therefore, the ordinance is not vetoed 
by the Governor General in Council, 
P. R. is restored to the cities men- 
tioned. The reverses sustained by 
the cause of true representation are 
only temporary. 



France- 
Reprinted from Representation. 
The result of the general election in 
France (first ballot April 26th, second 
ballot May 10th), has been a great 
victory for P. R. Estimates of the 
attitude of the new Chamber towards 
electoral reform state that its sup- 
porters number 352 as against 202 
declared opponents, while the remain- 
ing 48 members of the Chamber are 
classed as indeterminate. No doubt 
the action of the French Senate in 
rejecting on two different occasions 
the very conciliatory measures of 



proportional representation sent up 
by the Chamber stimulated popular 
resentment and helped to secure this 
overwhelming verdict. 

The opposition of the Senate may 
be a source of gain to the cause of 
P. R. in more ways than one. The 
last project submitted by the Cham- 
ber fell far short of what the more 
ardent proportionalists desired, and 
they offered it at a considerable sac- 
rifice in the hope of gaining at least 
a partial recognition of their princi- 
ple. Henceforth they intend to re- 
nounce compromise and accept no- 
thing less than the full measure of 
reform. In view of the elections, a 
spirited manifesto was issued by the 
organizations working for P. R. and 
placarded throughout the country, 
calling upon the elector to give reality 
to the principle of universal suffrage 
by the adoption of the proportional 
system of election. It was signed by 
the office-bearers of the five P. R. 
associations: — Bureau de Group e 
Parlementaire (M. le depute Chas. 
Benoist, President); Comitc Republi- 
caine de la R. P. (including men so dis- 
tinguished as M. Henri Bergson and 
M. Anatole France); Ligue pour la 
Representation Proportionnelle (.M. le 
Senateur Yves Guyot, President); 
Lique Radicale et Radical Socialiste de 
la R. P. (M. J. L. Bonnet, President'); 
Comite Extra- Parlementaire de la R. 
P. (M. L'avocat Henry Lemery, Pres- 
ident); and by 281 of the outgoing 
deputies. 



Holland. 

Reprinted from Representation. 
An article in La Gazette de Holland V, 
of the 23rd May, contains very im- 
portant information with regard to 
the State Commission appointed to 
consider the question of P. R. The 
report of the Commission, it is 



Proportional Representation Review 



157 



stated, unanimously recommends the 
application of P. R. in the elections 
of both Chambers of Parliament as 
well as in communal elections. The 
method proposed is a list system sim- 
ilar to that used in Belgium, in 
which party organizations arrange 
the order of candidates on their list, 
but each elector has the power to give 
a vote of preference to one candidate. 



Denmark. 



Reprinted from Representation. 
The Minister of the Interior intro- 
duced a bill last April into the Lower 
House of the Danish Parliament in 
which a system of proportional rep- 
resentation was proposed for the 
election of that House. We under- 
stand that the bill has passed through 
all its stages in the Lower House 
and is now under consideration in the 
Upper Chamber. 



Bulgaria. 

Reprinted from Representation. 

Owing to the extension of the fran- 
chise to new territory a fresh general 
election under the proportional sys- 
tem was held in Bulgaria in March, 
1914. 

We have received an interesting 
pamphlet extracted from the Swiss 
Review of Economics and Social Sci- 
ence {Blatter fur ll'irtschafts- und 
Socialpolitik) consisting of a report 
on P. R. made to the Bulgarian Par- 
liament by M. Alex. K. Ludskanoff, 
ex-minister of the Interior. The re- 
port deals specially with P. R. in 
Switzerland, Belgium, France and 
Servia and contains a general argu- 
ment in favor of electoral reform. 
It appears to have been mainly in- 
strumental in inducing the Bulgarians 
to follow the example of their Ser- 
vian neighbors and introduce P. R. 



into the Bulgarian constitution. The 
stability which P. R. gives parlia- 
mentary institutions must have been 
of no little advantage to Bulgaria 
in the hours of trial which they have 
recently gone through. 



Switzerland. 

In the autumn a vote is to be taken 
throughout Switzerland, under the 
provisions of the Initiative, on the 
adoption of P. R. for the election of 
the Federal Parliament. 

Of the four principal parties of 
the country, the Conservatives, the 
Catholics, the Socialists and the Radi- 
cals, all except the last-named have 
declared for P. R. As the Radicals, 
however, have a majority in the Fed- 
eral Parliament, and have not declar- 
ed for P. R., it is expected that they 
will oppose the measure when the 
vote is taken under the Initiative. 
Our correspondent in Switzerland, M. 
Philip Jamin of Geneva, thinks it 
likely that P. R. will triumph in the 
election by a small majority. 



Western Australia. 

Mr. E. J. Stenberg, Chief Electoral 
Officer of Western Australia, after 
an extended official investigation of 
various electoral systems, carried out 
in part in connection with a trip 
round the world, has issued a "Report 
upon the Principal Electoral Systems" 
in which he recommends for the elec- 
tion of the legislative assembly of 
his province a list system of propor- 
tional representation. Some of the 
provisions of the list system Mr. Sten- 
berg recommends seem to us unsat- 
isfactory, and we hope they will be 
changed before the system is adopted. 
We are very glad, however, that West- 
ern Australia seems likely to have 
some sort of proportional representa- 
tion soon. 



158 Equity 

THE SHORT BALLOT DEPARTMENT. 

Edited by H. S. Gilbertson, executive secretary of The National Short Ballot Organization, 
383 Fourth Avenue, New York City. 
Officers of the Short Ballot Organization: President, Woodrow Wilson. Vice-Presidents, 
Winston Churchill; Horace E. Deming; Ben B. Lindsey; William S. U'Ren; William Allen White; 
Clinton Rogers Woodruff; John Mitchell, Mt. Vernon, N. Y. Advisory Board, Lawrence F. Abbott, 
Richard S. Childs, Henry Jones Ford, Norman Hapgood, Woodrow Wilson. Secretary and Treas- 
urer, Richard S. Childs. Executive Secretary, H. S. Gilbertson. 



The Right Kind of Short Ballot. 

No less important than reducing 
the number of names on the ballot 
to a workable minimum, is that other 
phase of the Short Ballot idea: fixing 
administrative responsibility. 

For instance, the State of Maine 
now has few names on the ticket. A 
governor, a senator and a member 
of the lower house of legislation are 
the only state officers chosen by the 
Maine voter. The judiciary, the mi- 
nor state officers and some local of- 
ficers, elective in other states, are 
appointed. But how? Therein lies 
the joker. The governor appoints 
most of them but his selections must 
be confirmed by his council. The lat- 
ter body, instead of being an advisory 
cabinet composed of men because of 
their sympathy with his policies, is 
picked for him by the legislature for 
terms of one year. 

And so in Maine we find the same 
lack of directness of control by the 
people as where the ballot contains 
from 20 to 50 offices. The Governor 
is no more responsible for his ad- 
ministration when he has to consult 
his council than when he has to con- 
sult the party boss who exists else- 
where as the unofficial ticket-maker. 

In New York State there are those 
who believe in the Short Ballot but 
insist that the Governor should sub- 
mit his appointments to Senate con- 
firmation. This, we insist, vitiates 
the whole principle. Nothing must 
detract from the governor's account- 
ability. The New York Times, in 
answering President Nicholas Mur- 



ray Butler, sums up the whole pro- 
position by saying: 

"Quite possibly when the voters may 
concentrate their attention on a short 
ticket consisting of candidates for 
Governor and legislator only, they 
will choose better Governors and bet- 
ter Senators. Undoubtedly they will. 
But experience has shown that where- 
ever responsibility is divided careless- 
ness or selfish considerations creep 
in to prevent the best executive ac- 
tion. For some years to come, at any 
rate, the Senate will not be very 
trustworthy as a part of the ap- 
pointing power. Even New Jersey's 
bad Governors have made uniformly 
good appointments of Judges, because 
their action in each case was sole 
and conspicuous. No considerable 
error could be made by fixing the 
responsibility for appointing State 
officers in the Governor alone. The 
duty would not often be discharged 
without seeking good counsel." 



Short Ballot Legislatures. 

The Short Ballot doctrine, reduc- 
ed to its simplest formula, would 
read "elect none but the most import- 
ant officials." But who are they? 

In the ballot used in a typical dis- 
trict at the last election in New York 
City, twenty-one officers were listed. 
The candidates for the court of ap- 
peals stood first and second, the may- 
or third, the sheriff eleventh, the 
coroners from sixteenth to nineteenth. 
The Assembly candidates were last 
on the list, save for the aldermen. 

A ballot from Louisville, Kentucky, 
provides for fifty-nine separate of- 



The Short Ballot Department 

fices. Candidates for the Assembly cities. All 
and the Senate stand fifty-sixth and 
fifty-seventh! Long before the vot- 
er reaches them he is invited to vote 
for county assessor, jailer, bailiff of 
the police court, city treasurer, park 
commissioners and aldermen; the 
only officials which rank lower are 
a district magistrate and constable. 

These were no mere accidents. The 
order in which the legislative candi- 
dates appear on the ballot is very 
much the same in every state; but 
what is more to the point, there is 
good reason to believe that it reveals 
the degree of affection in which 
the people hold their representatives. 

And what of the logic? In a gov- 
ernment "of laws" legislation natur- 
ally comes first. Before the Gov- 
ernor can act the legislature must 
supply him laws to execute; before 
he can move he must get appropria- 
tions. Before the courts can inter- 
pret, there must be laws to be ap- 
plied and construed. The legislature 
is the real lever of popular govern- 
ment. 

There is a general complaint 
of the quality of both legislators and 
legislation. Perhaps the simplest ex- 
planation of it is the minor import- 
ance which we attach to them. The 
fact is, in electing clerks and coro- 
ners and even judges, we have been 
trying to control the government by 
attacking effects instead of causes. 

Then why not try this simple 
remedy? Give the legislators a place 
of real dignity and importance; in- 
vert our thinking and put legislators 
foremost and the coroners in the 
background, under careful guard- 
ianship, to be sure, but out of sight 
on election day, just as they are at 
all other times. 

This is the plan which has been 
tried with such great success in 300 



159 

minor officers like the 
city treasurer, city \clerk and the 
rest have been retired to the rear 
and the men who really direct the 
affairs of the city, the regulating 
body, have focussed upon them the 
whole attention of the voters. This 
is controlling Government at its source. 



Indiana's 



Chance. 

Indiana 



The people of Indiana have ' a 
chance at the coming November 
election to win back their government. 
But it will take iorganization and 
publicity to do it. The recent legis- 
lature, desirous of warding off any 
changes in the present instrument 
and yet wishing to appear amenable 
to the wishes of progressive people, 
agreed to submit the question of 
holding a constitutional convention, 
but it will require a majority of all 
votes cast at the election and not a 
majority on the question to carry the 
proposition. The standpat contin- 
gency have a decided advantage which 
can be overcome only by a lot of 
hard work. 

On the strength of rather slim 
possibilities, the Extension Division 
of the University of Indiana held a 
constitutional conference at Bloom- 
ington on June 8-10th. The various 
needs of the state, which could be 
met only by constitutional change, 
were discussed in a series of ad- 
dresses. The Short Ballot was pre- 
sented by the Executive Secretary, 
who found a strong sentiment in fav- 
or of the idea, which extended even 
to the proposition of an appointive 
judiciary. 

At the end of the conference a 
New Constitution League was started, 
for the purpose of uniting the various 
organizations and interests which are 
in favor of constructive measures. 

No state needs the Short Ballot 
worse than Indiana. It has the usual 
long state ticket — even the state sta- 
tistician is elected, the present in- 
cumbent being a stone mason by pro- 
fession. Its county and judiciary 
systems are extraordinary for their 
complexity. It is the only state west 
of the Hudson River, except Nevada, 
which has made absolutely no provi- 
sion for simplified city government. 



Equity 

[Formerly Equity Series] 

Devoted to Improved Methods of Self -Government, as the Initiative, 
Referendum, Recall, Proportional Representation, Direct Primaries, the 
Preferential Ballot, the Short Ballot, etc., and the simplification and 
increased efficiency of Government in Municipalities, States and Nation. 



50 cents per year 
15 cents per copy 



Quarterly 



Philadelphia, October, 1914 



Contents 



EDITORIAL: 



Page 



The Failure of Diplomacy 163 

A Proposed International Constitution 166 



THE INITIATIVE, REFERENDUM AND RECALL DEPARTMENT: 

The Power to Declare War 171 

Municipal Initiative, Referendum and Rtmll in Practise 172 

National Popular Government League Assaui Sullivan and Penrose 172 



THE MARCH OF POPULAR GOVERN MUST— Being a Quarterly Record of the 

Progress of Direct Legislation in the Various States 173 



Arizona 173 

Arkansas 174 

California 175 

Colorado 176 

Illinois 178 

Indiana 178 

Maryland 1 79 

Massachusetts 179 



Michigan 180 

Minnesota 180 

Mississippi 181 

Missouri 182 

Montana 184 

Nebraska 185 

New York 186 



North Dakota 187 

Ohio 187 

Oregon 188 

Pennsylvania 189 

Texas 190 

Washington 190 

Wisconsin 191 



PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION REVIEW: 

C. G. Hoag, Editor 
Notes 192 

Proportional Representation 193 

South Africa, Ireland, The House of Lords, New Zealand, Australia, 

France 200 - 202 

Canadian Labor Elections 203 



THE SHORT BALLOT DEPARTMENT: 

H. S. Gilbertson, Editor 

Direct Primaries and the Short Ballot 

Progress Under the City Manager Plan 

Conference for Better County Government 



205 
207 
208 



Equity 



[Formerly Equity Series] 

Including the Direct Legislation Record, the Referendum News and the 
Proportional Representation Review 

The purpose of this publication is to improve the machinery for self -government, to pro- 
mote honest and efficient government, and to place public affairs and public officials 
under direct final control of the electorate. The ideal is: That every American commun- 
ity — town, city and county — shall have the freest and simplest plan of self-government 
possible, resulting in the most efficient government possible: That every state shall have 
a short and simple constitution, fewer and better laws, and a more efficient government: 
That the National constitution shall be more easy to amend than at present, and that it 
shall be possible for the people of the Nation to express themselves definitely concerning 
National issues whenever they may wish to do so. 



Charles Fremont Taylor, Editor and Publisher 
EDWIN S. POTTER, Associate Editor 

1520 Chestnut St., Philadelphia, Pa. 



J. W. Sullivan, New York City 

Founder of the Direct Legislation Record 
Eltweed Pomeroy, Donna, Texas 

Former Editor of the Direct Legislation Record 
Geo. H. Shibley, Washington, D. C. 
,,r ^ ,„~ Founder of the Referendum News 
W. S. U'Ren, Oregon, 

Father of the "Oregon System" 
Senator Rob't. L. Owen 

President of the National Popular Govern- 
ment League 
Dr. Wm. Preston Hill, St. Louis, Mo. 

Father of the Initiative and Referendum in 
Missouri 
Robert M. La Follette 

T _, „ U.S. Senator from Wisconsin 

Judge Ben B. Lindsey, Denver, Colo. 
Dr. John Randolph Haynes 

Los Angeles, Cal. 
^ «r -^ Father of the Recall in California 
Dr. Wm. Draper Lewis, Philadelphia, Pa. 
Samuel Gompers 

President of American Federation of Labor 
Moses E. Clapp 

WOODBRIDGE N. F^fs ^^ *""* Mi ^ S ^ 

George H. Hodges G ° Vem0r ° f Mkhigan 

Governor of Kansas 



EDITORIAL COUNSELLORS 



George E. Chamberlain 

U. S. Senator from Oregon 
J. H. Ralston, Washington. D. C. 
Delos F. Wilcox New York 
L. F. C. Garvin 

Ex-G vernor of Rhode Island 
George Norris 

U. S. Senator from Nebraska 
Miles Poindexter 

U. S. Senator from Washington 
Morris Sheppard 

U. S. Senator from Texas 
Prof. Chas. Zueblin 

Publicist and Lecturer 
M. Clyde Kelley 

Member of Congress from Pennsylvania 
William Allen White 

Editor. Emporia, Kan., Gazette 
Francis Kellor 

Chief of Progressive National Service 
Carl Vrooman, Bloomington, 111. 
Lieut. C. P. Shaw. Virginia 
George H. Duncan, New Hampshire 
James W. Buckxin, Grand Junction, Colo. 

Father of Grand Junction System of Prefer- 
ential Voting. 



Entered at the Philadelphia Post Office as Second-class Matter 



Single copies, 15 cents; 50 cents per year; three years, SI. To facilitate the spread of the causes 
represented by this magazine, four yearly subscriptions will be sent to different addresses for $1; 
special rates for yearly subscriptions or single numbers for propaganda purposes supplied on applic 
ation. 



EDITORIAL 



VOL. XVI— No. 4 October, 1914 



The Failure of Diplomacy. 

The result of the latest failure of 
diplomacy is now stupifying the en- 
tire world. The onset was so sudden 
that financial interests, commercial 
interests and all other interests were 
caught unawares, and horror is the 
only word that even feebly expresses 
the universal condition of the world 
today. Diplomacy failed even to de- 
lay, or in the least degree to stay or 
modify, the conflagration of war. 

This utter failure calls for an 
examination of present international 
diplomacy, and it cries aloud for a 
method which shall deal safely and 
efficienctly with the lives, property 
and other interests of mankind. Past 
and present methods of government, 
which have been unable to prevent, 
and which now permit, such colossal 
tragedies as the daily slaughter and 
destruction now in progress in Eu- 
rope — these methods stand condemned 
for utter inefficiency. The most im- 
portant problem now before the 
human race is to devise, develop and 
put into practise some method which 
shall render forever impossible, 
wholesale murder and destruction by 
authority, as is now in progress in 
Europe. 

The famous "Go, my son, and see 
with how little wisdom the world is 
governed" now has a new and start- 
ling meaning. And the search-light 



now being put upon diplomacy shows 
what a weak and gauzy dependence 
it is in times of stress — just when 
something really strong and efficient 
is needed. 

The "White Books" and other au- 
thoritative publications issued by the 
governments involved, containing the 
history of the diplomatic events up to 
the beginning of the colossal crime, 
have had a very wide reading among 
people not intimately familiar with 
the ways of diplomacy. The first and 
strongest impression made by these 
publications is the surprising extent 
to which diplomacy consists of indef- 
inite and apparently irresponsible 
"conversations." Perhaps such weak 
methods do lead to the minimization 
and sometimes to the removal of 
minor irritations among nations, but 
when put to a supreme test, as during 
July, 1914, diplomacy fails complete- 
ly. And after such failure, during 
the wholesale butchery resulting from 
such failure, and for many years af- 
ter, the best minds engage in undig- 
nified bickering: "did," "didn't," "did- 
n't," "did," etc., naturally resulting 
from such slipshod methods of which 
our present diplomacy consists. 

The difficulty is this: diplomats 
lack authority — except in specially 
authorized peace conventions. So all 
that they can really do is to have 
"conversations," and report them to 
their home governments. This will 
always be true, as long as individual 
nations are supreme in those things 
that affect all humanity. There 
should be and there must be a limit 



164 



Equity 



to such supremacy. No nation should 
be "sovereign" to the extent of en- 
gaging in the manufacture of arms, 
ammunition, etc., designed for whole- 
sale human slaughter, thus menacing 
civilization. Proof of a horrifying 
realization of this menace to which 
civilization has been subjected is con- 
tained in the news bulletins which 
are constantly coming from Europe. 

The most pressing duty of civiliza- 
tion at present is to make itself 
stable and permanent. If it can't do 
that, civilization is a monstrous fail- 
ure. The first step toward perman- 
ency is the removal of the causes of 
impermanency — the removal of de- 
structive forces. Diplomacy cannot 
conserve. It has been useful in minor 
ways, but it fails in times of great 
stress. 

What are the destructive forces? 
Look at the continent of Europe at 
the present time and these can easily 
be seen. They consist primarily of 
conflicting "sovereignties," every sep- 
arate "sovereignty" exercising the 
privilege of making unlimited prep- 
aration for the destruction of other 
''sovereignties." 

If civilization shall become stable, 
it must itself become sovereign. It 
can do so only by a union of the ex- 
isting "sovereignties." The first pur- 
pose of the supreme sovereignty, con- 
sisting of the existing sovereignties, 
must be to claim a monopoly of all 
military power and authority, in the 
interest of all constituent "sovereign- 
ties." The primary object of the su- 



preme sovereignty would be to keep 
the peace within and protect from 
external attack. This is now the 
primary purpose of every sovereign 
state, but the trouble is that there are 
too many sovereign states, and they 
conflict. Treaties fail, for in times 
of stress they may become only 
"scraps of paper," offering no pro- 
tection from an invading army. The 
conflict of "sovereignties" (interna- 
tional war) can be removed only by 
each "sovereignty" giving up its 
sovereignty concerning war and the 
preparations for war to a supreme 
sovereignty made up of the combined 
sovereignties. 

International war can be prevented 
in no other way. Peace meetings can 
never do it. This is not a matter of 
sentiment, nor of Christianity. It is 
a question of improvement in the 
methods of government. "With how 
little wisdom the world is governed!" 
The slaughter and destruction now 
going on in Europe is stupendous and 
stupifying folly. When will the na- 
tions get wisdom ? Wherever the vic- 
tory may finally perch in the present 
conflict, all the nations involved will 
lose heavily — have already lost heav- 
ily. The application of common sense 
to government would have saved all 
this loss — will save all future loss by 
war. Diplomacy has failed. Present 
methods have recently broken down 
completely, as they have heretofore. 
Will these discredited methods be per- 
sisted in? 

The trust idea in economics is 



Editorial 

needed now in international politics. deficient 
The trust stops competition among its 
constituents, stops the expense of all 
the paraphernalia of competition, and 
if it covers its field efficiently, every 
constituent is safer and better off. So 
a trust among nations for the preven- 
tion of war would benefit every con- 
stituent nation, lessening the expense 
for defense and at the same time be- 
coming safer from external attack. 

In lawless communities where every 
man must provide for his own de- 
fense, his expense and effort for de- 
fense are much greater than they are 
in a civilized community. Shall not 
nations form a "civilized community," 
as individuals have, and get the same 
benefits? An individual coming from 
a lawless place into a civilized com- 
munity has to give up his weapons 
and must abstain from aggression, 
yielding his "preparedness" to the 
police, and receiving the protection 
of all the machinery of the law. In 
such a primitive matter, cannot na- 
tions act as intelligently as individ- 
uals do? 

During the Revolutionary war the 
American colonies were sealed to- 
gether by the necessity of a common 
defense. They were formally feder- 
ated by the Articles of Federation. 
These Articles served very well dur- 
ing the pressure of external war, but 
when that pressure was removed, new 
dangers arose. The taxing power 
given to the federal authority was de- 
ficient, and the power for defense 
against external enemies and for pre- 
venting internal dissentions was also 



165 

In 1787 a new constitution 
was proposed to the states, under 
which they were to yield a part of 
their "sovereignty" to the Federal 
Government, but each state received 
in return much more than it yielded. 
Each state received better protection 
from foreign countries and from oth- 
er states than it could have possibly 
provided for itself, and at a nominal 
cost; and every state received innum- 
erable other advantages beside. Now 
Massachusetts is not jealous of New 
York, and Colorado is not looking for 
a port. Some of our states are larger 
in territory, population and wealth 
than some of the nations of Europe. 
The smaller states are at no disad- 
vantage as compared with the larger 
states. Our standing army and navy 
are much smaller and less expensive 
than would be the aggregate of 48 
standing armies and no telling how 
many navies, if the states were an 
"armed camp" against one another; 
and our wealth and happiness are in- 
comparably greater than if the latter 
condition existed. 

Would not a United States of Europe 
along similar lines be a much greater 
contribution to the stability of civil- 
ization than the present chaos exist- 
ing in that unhappy continent? In- 
ternational diplomacy has lamentably 
failed; and something better must 
take its place, else Europe will con- 
tinue to lapse, periodically, back into 
barbarism; and each lapse will be 
more terrible than any preceding. 
Can civilization afford to continue to 
carry the risk involved in separate 



166 



Equity 



national sovereignties in regard to 
war? Will the civilization of Europe 
become sufficiently rational to elim- 
inate the danger of a repetition of the 
present staggering sacrifice of men, 
culture, wealth and all the substan- 
tial and refinements that go to make 
up civilization? Let the intelligence 
of humanity answer. 



A Proposed International Constitution. 

The Editor of this magazine was 
caught in Europe by the sudden out- 
burst of war. Fortunately he was 
caught in Stockholm, Sweden, one of 
the safest places in Europe as well 
as one of the most beautiful. The 
appalling circumstances so impressed 
upon his mind the importance of inter- 
national federation that he could not 
help writing out a proposed constitu- 
tion under which that desirable ob- 
ject might be achieved. Of course, 
he realizes that this is only a first at- 
tempt at a problem full of the great- 
est possible difficulties, and he puts 
it forward modestly, only as a "first 



attempt." Perhaps it is the first at- 
tempt ever made to actually write out 
a proposed international constitution. 
But a beginning must be made some 
time, and certainly now is the time to 
begin. The Editor will be pleased to 
receive comments, suggestions or crit- 
icisms. 

The thing that is uppermost in 
thoughtful minds now is the feder- 
ation of European nations, or a suffi- 
cient number of them to insure future 
European peace. If the realization 
shall be thus limited, the larger idea 
of the federation of all civilized na- 
tions must sometime come forward. 
The following constitution can be ap- 
plied either way. The object of gov- 
ernment is primarily the protection 
of the lives, property and other vital 
interests of the people comprising the 
government. At present, all these 
things are being ruthlessly sacrificed 
in Europe, owing to the inadequacy of 
the present methods of government. 
Hence the following proposed inter- 
national constitution: 



Proposed Constitution for an International Government. 

Preamble. 

In order to prevent war, abolish national armaments (except lim- 
ited police provisions to preserve internal peace, law and order), 
diminish national prejudices, and to promote peace, prosperity, happi- 
ness and the general welfare, we, the people of the nations which shall 
agree to this compact, as signified by affirmative popular vote after 
thorough discussion and authoritative submission, do ordain and estab- 
lish this inviolable instrument, and proclaim it as a sign and evidence 
of a higher civilization than any that the human race has heretofore 
attained. 

Article I. 

All local governmental authority shall remain as at present con- 
stituted or as may hereafter be legally constituted within the constitu- 
ent nations, except as necessarily modified by this constitution. 

Article II. 

All general governmental authority shall be given, and is hereby 
given, to two bodies, a Senate and a Representat, composed as pro- 
vided herein, which shall constitute the International Government. 



Editorial 167 

But the constituent nations and the people therein reserve the right 
of initiative, referendum and recall, as shall be provided. 

Article III. 

1. The Senate shall consist of three members from each con- 
stituent nation, and an additional member for each 50,000,000 popula- 
tion and (or) major fraction thereof in any constituent nation, not 
including colonial possessions. 

2. The international senators shall be chosen by the legislative 
authority of each constituent nation, in joint session if such authority 
be lodged in two bodies. 

3. The regular length of term for international senators shall 
be seven years; but succession shall be so arranged that a change of 
not more than one-third of the body shall be made in any one calendar 
year. 

4. The compensation of international senators shall be fifteen 
thousand dollars per year, with ten cents per mile for the necessary 
traveling distance from the home of each senator to the place of 
meeting and return, once per year. 

Article IV. 

1. The Representat shall consist of a representative for each 
5,000,000 population and major fraction thereof in each constituent 
nation, not including colonial possessions, popularly elected by the 
regular voters in each constituent nation, according to regulations 
to be established by the popular representative body or "lower house" 
in each constituent nation. But each constituent nation shall have at 
least one such representative. 

2. The regular length of term for representatives shall be three 
years; and the term of not more than one-half of the membership of 
this body shall expire in one calendar year. 

3. The compensation of representatives shall be ten thousand 
dollars per year, with the same mileage as that allowed for senators. 

Article V. 

1. The Senate shall be in constant session except for one per- 
missible recess in any calendar year not to exceed thirty consecutive 
days, counting Sundays. During such recess a committee of at 
least three members shall remain on duty, with such discretionary 
power as may be granted by the Senate. Longer or additional vaca- 
tions may be granted to individual members by majority vote of the 
Senate, but not more than one-fourth of the body may be absent from 
duty at any time except during a recess. 

2. The Representat shall have annual sessions, and it shall 
determine the time of convening and length of sessions; but extra- 
ordinary sessions of the Representat may be called by a two-thirds 
vote of the Senate. 

Article VI. 

1. The Senate and Representat shall each select its president and 
other officers, and shall determine the duties, powers and compensation 

of the same. The president of each body shall be a member, but the 
other officers need not be members. Each body shall determine its 
own rules. 

2. The credentials of membership of each body shall be de- 
termined by a court to be designated or established by both bodies in 
joint session. But until such court is designated or established, each 
body may judge the credentials of its own members. 

Article VII. 
Senators and Representatives shall be subject to recall at any 
time after six months' incumbency in office by the constituencies rep- 
resented, respectively. The process of recall may be established by the 
different constituencies represented; but if not so established within 



168 Equity 

three years after the establishment of this constitution, the Senate 
shall establish a process of recall for senators, and the Representat for 
representatives, to be applied in constituencies in which no process of 
recall has been established, until said constituencies shall establish a 
process of recall. 

Article VIII. 

1. Powers of the International Government: The Government 
hereby established shall acquire, possess and have full authority over 
all military and naval establishments in the signatory nations. This 
shall mean all ships of war, fortifications of all kinds, artillery for 
land and sea, arms of all kinds for both calvalry and infantry, ammu- 
nition and military stores of all kinds, and all military apparatus for 
navigating the air. Police provisions for the maintenance of internal 
peace and order shall be permitted to the constituent nations; but 
the total strength of the same may be limited by the International 
Government. Militia may be permitted to the constituent nations, but 
its regulation and control must primarily reside in the International 
Government. 

2. A standing army and navy shall be maintained by this Govern- 
ment, sufficient to maintain peace among the constituent nations and 
to protect any and all the constituent nations from outside aggression. 

3. All international relations of a political nature among the 
signatory nations shall be under the entire crntrol of this Govern- 
ment, which shall, in its discretion, deal with them directly, or estab- 
lish a court for this purpose. 

4. Declaration of war against, or the conclusion of peace with, 
any power foreign to this International Government shall be the ex- 
clusive province of this Government as herein constituted. 

5. This Government shall be supported by revenue raised by its 
own authority from individuals or private corporations, and not by 
assessment of the constituent nations. Taxes may be laid in any man- 
ner that the wisdom of the Government may devise, but the method 
or methods adopted shall be applied uniformly in all the nations con- 
stituting the International Government. 

6. Commerce may be regulated among the constituent nations of 
this Government, and between this Government as a whole, or any 
one or more of its constituent nations, and any one or more nations 
foreign to this Government, by this Government as herein constituted. 

7. An international coinage system may be proposed by this 
Government to its constituent nations, and it may put the same into 
operation among those constituent nations assenting to the plan. 

8. Each constituent nation shall have full control of education 
and language within its boundaries; but the Government may make 
regulations as to the language or languages to be used orally among 
its individual members. All public documents must be published in the 
legal language of each constituent nation for use in each nation. 

9. All treaties, either between constituent nations, or between a 
constituent nation and a nation foreign to this Government, may be 
revised by the Senate. 

Article IX. 

1. The Government shall make international laws for the pur- 
poses set forth in this instrument. 

2. The business of the Senate and Representat shall be co- 
ordinated by a co-ordinating committee consisting of three members 
elected from and by each House in a manner to best secure a fair 
representation of varying sentiments or factions, and one member to 
be appointed by the highest court established by the Government, and 
this member may be a member of said court,* but not a member of 
either House; and until such court shall be established, the seventh 
member of the co-ordinating committee shall be elected by a majority 
vote of both Houses in joint session. 



Editorial 169 

3. This co-ordinating committee shall have authority over the 
sequence of consideration and voting upon bills in both Houses, to the 
effect that neither House shall neglect bills passed by the other 
House. 

4. A quorum of either House shall be a majority of its members. 

5. Ordinary bills shall become laws upon passage by both Houses 
by a majority of members present, and the signature of the president 
of each House. 

6. All revenue bills shall originate in the Representat; but they 
may be amended by the Senate if said amendments are acceptable to the 
Representat. Any revenue bill, when rejected by the Senate, if pass- 
ed by a two-thirds vote of the entire membership of the Representat 
twice, the votings to be separated by an interval of at least thirty 
diurnal days, including Sundays, shall become law. 

Article X. 
The chief administrative branch is the Senate. Additional adminis- 
trative provisions may be established by law. Additional administra- 
tive officers shall be proposed by the Senate and confirmed by the Rep- 
resentat. They shall be under the direction and control of the Senate, 
and subject to dismissal by a majority vote of that body; but they 
shall be subject to recall by a two-thirds vote of the entire member- 
ship of the Representat. 

Article XI. 
At the first general election for the election of the Representat 
after this constitution shall have been in operation ten consecutive 
years, the Senate and Representat shall, by majority vote of each, 
submit to the popular electorate a system of popular initiative and 
referendum, both for ordinary general legislation and also for consti- 
tutional amendment, which shah be'deemed a part of this constitution if 
favored by a majority of the voters voting thereon in a majority of 
the constitutent nations, if such majority shall also constitute a ma- 
jority of the sum total of all the votes cast thereon in all the constitu- 
ent nations. 

Article XII. 
V. This constitution may be amended, in addition to the pro- 
vision in the previous article, as follows: 

Upon demand of the Senate and Representat, by majority vote 
of each, or by a two-thirds vote of either the Senate or Representat 
on two separate occasions, separated by a period of not less than two 
years nor more than five years, any proposed amendment of this con- 
stitution shall be submitted to the electorate at the next election of 
the Representat, but it shall be passed and made a part of public rec- 
ords not less than one year previous to said election; and said amend- 
ment shall be considered adopted and made a part of this constitution 
if favored by a three-fifths majority of all the votes cast thereon in 
three-fifths of the constituent nations, if such majority also consti- 
tute a three-fifths majority of the sum total of all the votes cast 
thereon in all the constituent nations. 

2. Provisions shall be made by law for informing voters con- 
cerning measures or constitutional amendments submitted to popular 
vote. 

Comment by the Author. equal representation in the Senate, 

One of the "bones of contention" while the large states contended for 

in this constitution will be the com- representation according to popula- 

position of the Senate, as it was in tion. This question came near break- 

our convention in Philadelphia in ing up the convention. Finally the 

! 1787. The problem was a new one large states yielded, as, it was argued, 

i then. The small states contended for the lower House was based on popu- 



170 



Equity 



lation. Really the line of difference 
is that the Senate represents the 
state governments, while the House 
represents the people. That is the 
idea in the above proposed constitu- 
tion — that the Senate shall represent 
governments. In 1787 our state gov- 
ernments wanted representation as 
such, as the state idea was then 
dominant, the national idea not being 
developed much at that time. But 
the recent amendment providing for 
popular election of United States 
senators changes somewhat the orig- 
inal idea. United States senators 
will henceforth represent the people 
of their states, rather than the state 
government. 

In any international constitutional 
convention this same question would 
arise, and at the present time, 
governments, as such, would demand 
representation, just as our states de- 
manded representation, and equal 
representation, as such. In the course 
of years, under such a constitution, 
particularly after free diffusion of the 
people from one nation into another, 
which takes place to a considerable 
extent under the present restrictions, 
the local national feeling would be- 
come much less than it is at present. 
The state feeling among us has al- 
most entirely disappeared. 

One danger might be that some of 
the empires, as Germany, would wish 
to break up and claim representation 
in the Senate for each constituent 
part, and thus control the entire 
Senate. This would have to be guard- 
ed against. And I think that rather 
more representation in the Senate ac- 
cording to population would be de- 
manded than I have provided for, as 
France, for example, would want 
more senators than Holland or Nor- 
way. The problem would be to keep 
the Senate small, and yet satisfy the 



small nations. A better plan than I 
have presented for this could doubt- 
less be devised. My plan is "the 
first dash," and I add these comments 
for modification. 

Perhaps a better way to constitute 
the Senate than the one given above 
would be by the Norwegian plan for 
constituting the upper House; that 
is, provide that the Representat select 
the Senate from its own members. In 
this way the Senate could be strictly 
limited in numbers, and there would 
be no complaint of excess of repre- 
sentation of the smaller nations in 
the Senate. Provision could easily 
be made that one-third of the Senate 
pass out of office and be renewed 
each second year. It might be desir- 
able occasionally to make a selection 
for the Senate outside of the Repre- 
sentat. The constitution might grant 
permission to the effect that one- 
third of the Senate may be consti- 
tuted from outside of the membership 
of the Representat. 

The giving up of armies and arma- 
ments would be "a bitter pill" to the 
governmental authorities of some na- 
tions, but they would have to yield 
to this absolute necessity. The first 
step for peace among people who 
want to fight is to disarm them; and 
if all are disarmed they are on as 
equal a footing as if all were armed 
to the utmost, only they could not do 
much harm when disarmed — and the 
first object of an international gov- 
ernment would be to put a permanent 
stop to the waste, destruction and 
horrors of war. And we want to put 
a stop to the contention that battle- 
ships make £or peace. They would 
if one nation were sufficiently strong 
to domina J the whole world; but 
that would be peace only on the terms 
of that one nation. We want to make 
one power sufficiently strong to dom- 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



171 



inate the whole world, but we want 
that to be an international power, 
controlled by an international gov- 
ernment constituted justly to all con- 
cerned. Then battleships, owned and 
directed by that government, would 
make for peace, both among the con- 
stituent nations and between the 
"union" and the outside world, by 
protecting the constituent nations 
from both internal and external ag- 
gression. 

The only way to secure and certain- 
ly preserve the world's peace is by 
some such combination of nations, 
the aggregate of which would be 
sufficiently strong to successfully 
meet aggression by the rest of the 
world, the internal peace being se- 
cured by disarmament of the consti- 
tuent nations, and placing all arma- 
ments under the control of the inter- 
national government, for the preser- 
vation of internal peace and protec- 
tion from external aggression. 



This is a large subject, but we must 
take it up some time, and just now 
it is forced upon us. Its importance 
overshadows everything else. Shall 
we shirk or face it? The most im- 
portant task that humanity has be- 
fore it is the permanent prevention 
of war. This should be done in a 
way in which the support of arma- 
ments shall be reduced to the mini- 
mum, in order to reduce the burden. 
A plan by which the armaments of 
the constituent nations shall be uni- 
ted and maintained only to the point 
of domination over outside opposition 
would secure this minimum, which 
would be reduced as new nations 
would come into the plan, until it 
would disappear entirely. The main 
object of war prevention being se- 
cured, many other advantages would 
come along in the wake of co-opera- 
tion along this line, which would be 
far reaching beyond our present con- 
ception. 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department. 

Continuing the Direct Legislation Record, which the first publication devoted to the Initiative 
and Referendum. It was started in New Jersey, in 1893, by J. W. Sullivan, as the organ for the 
National Direct Legislation League and various State Leagues. It was continued from 1894 to 
1904 by Mr. Eltweed Pomeroy, and revived and included in Equity Series in 1906. 

Also continuing the Referendum News, formerly published in Washington, D. C, by Mr. Geo. 
H. Shibley, and consolidated with Equity Series early in 1907. 



The Power to Declare War. 

While the President of the United 
States is not empowered by the con- 
stitution to declare this nation at war, 
it is well understood that the Presi- 
dent may, however, so shape the 
policy of his administration of for- 
eign affairs as to create a situation 
from which the congress cannot es- 
cape without a declaration of war. 
Experience has repeatedly proved 
this. Some injudicic s or meddle- 
some policy may serve to arouse an- 
other nation to back up some overt 
act and our jingo press does the rest 



by stirring up the ignorant and un- 
thinking part of the public with the 
idea that our national honor is at 
stake. Then it is the unwritten law 
that Congress must stand by the 
President. 

Thus by a majority vote of a Con- 
gress in no wise instructed as to the 
pending issue, a question involving 
war for this whole nation of 100,000,- 
000 souls may be decided irrevocably, 
without there having been any ex- 
pression of the will of the people 
themselves. 

Is this as it should be? Irrespec- 



172 

tive of the larger question of disarm- 
ament thru the creation of an inter- 
national government, can we, the 
citizens of this republic, afford longer 
to place in any one official or set of 
officials the power to declare our na- 
tion at war without first having con- 
sulted us about it and having obtain- 
ed our consent? 

On every side we read or hear 
criticism of the nations of Europe 
for having let a handful of rulers or 
ruling cliques drag the great nations 
thereof into this collosal tragedy. 
But how much safer are we? 

Allan Benson, the Socialist writer, 
is directing the attention of the pub- 
lic, by a series of articles, to the 
urgent need of an amendment to the 
constitution to run substantially 
thus: "War shall not be declared ex- 
cept by direct vote of all the men and 
women of the United States." 

Benson suggests that at least sixty 
days should be given for the people 
to make up their voting mind and 
that the ballots be prepared so as to 
require each voter to sign his name 
thereto. Then, in the event of a ma- 
jority being cast for war, those per- 
sons who voted in the affirmative 
"should be called on to serve until 
all of them had been sent to the 
front," and after which others might 
be required to serve. He would have 
this rule applied regardless of sex, 
but he does not believe that many 
women would ever vote for war. 



Municipal Initiative, Referendum and 
Recall in Practise. 

In the October issue of the National 
Municipal Review there is an article 
on the above subject by the Editor of 
Equity. The gathering of the mater- 
ial for this article involved a great 
deal of labor, but the value of the 
information obtained fully justified 



Equity 

the effort. It was found that out of 
279 municipalities which have adopt- 
ed a modern system of government, 
only 18 are entirely without the Ini- 
tiative, Referendum or Recall. Of the 
remaining 261 municipalities, 197 
have the Initiative, Referendum and 
Recall; 36 have the Initiative and 
Referendum; 4 have the Referendum 
and Recall; 4 the Initiative and Re- 
call; 2 the Initiative only; 2 have the 
Referendum only and 14 the Recall 
only. 

The real purpose of the investiga- 
tion was to discover to what extent 
these instrumentalities have been 
actually used; and it is gratifying 
that their use has been very con- 
servative. Of the 261 municipalities, 
31 have used the Initiative, 26 have 
used the Referendum and 27 have us- 
ed the Recall. This is an effective 
answer to those reactionaries who 
claim that the I., R. and R. lead to the 
constant submission of trifling ques- 
tions, and hence a constant disturb- 
ance to the electorate. The facts 
show this to be absolutely untrue in 
practise. The article shows specific- 
ally the place and date of all the 
above mentioned uses, so that any 
such use in any place can readily be 
referred to and verified. This is per- 
haps the first attempt that has been 
made to gather and present these 
facts. They are eloquent proof of 
the ability of the American public to 
take a direct hand in local govern- 
ment, and to do it conservatively and 
intelligently. 



National Popular Government League 
Assails Sullivan and Penrose. 

The National Popular Government 
League has come out in active opposi- 
tion to Mr. Boise Penrose in Pennsyl- 
vania and Mr. Roger Sullivan in Il- 
linois, for the U. S. Senate, on the 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



173 



ground that Penrose is a Republican 
Boss and Sullivan a Democratic Boss; 
that both of them are opposed to 
popular government; that both of 
them are conspicuously notable in 
having heretofore been identified with 
the evil and selfish interests of their 
respective states, and that these in- 
terests have contributed large sums 
to their nominations and are now 
fighting for them and spending money 
on a large scale to bring about their 
election. 

Democratic senators like Senators 
Owen, Hollis, Lane and Ashurst ap- 
prove this action of the National 
Popular Government League, and Re- 
publican senators, such as Senator 
Norris of Nebraska, Kenyon of Iowa, 
Clapp of Minnesota, and Poindexter 
of Washington, joined in this fight 
against the bi-partisan boss system 
which has been illustrated in such an 
evil way in Illinois and in Pennsyl- 
vania. 

The issue really turns upon the 
question of popular government and 
progressive democracy, and the hos- 
tility of these schools of opinion 
against the bi-partisan system with 
corrupt business in Illinois, and the 
point is made against both Mr. Sulli- 
van and Mr. Penrose that they are 
typical examples of this combination 
of selfish business and unscrupulous 
politics. 

A number of the above named sen- 
ators will speak in the states named, 
against the party candidates on the 
ground that the welfare of the coun- 
try is more important than the wel- 
fare of the party nominee, and that 
both parties ought to be taught bet- 
ter conduct than to make such nomi- 
nations. 

This magazine is glad to note the 
militant program of the National 
Popular Government League. Equity 



is devoted to principles, seldom, if 
ever, taking a position for or against 
persons. But it recognizes the truth 
that popular government must be won 
by flesh and blood human beings, and 
that it is important to progress that 
the enemies of popular government 
should not be placed in places of high 
official influence and power. If they 
cannot be converted they should be 
defeated. We venture here to ex- 
press the hope that the National Pop- 
ular Government League and other 
influences for progress will be suc- 
cessful in defeating the two above 
named conspicuous enemies of pop- 
ular government. And we particular- 
ly desire the election in Illinois of 
Raymond Robins, a conspicuous, 
tried and true friend of popular gov- 
ernment. 



The March of 
Popular Government 



Arizona. 

An important improvement in the 
Initiative and Referendum section of 
the Arizona constitution is to be on 
the ballots, November 3d, for the 
voters to accept or reject, along with 
a number of other measures. In Sec- 
tion 6 of Article IV of the constitu- 
tion it is provided that "the veto 
power of the governor shall not ex- 
tend to Initiative or Referendum 
measures approved by a majority of 
the qualified electors." It was found, 
however, that this left the door wide 
open for the legislature to amend or 
repeal any law made by popular 
vote. The proposed amendment de- 
clares that "the power of the legis- 
lature," as well as the veto power of 
the governor, shall not extend to I. 
and R. measures approved by a ma- 
jority of the electors. 



174 



The argument in support of this 
amendment, as it appears in the of- 
ficial publicity pamphlet issued by- 
Secretary of State Osborn, was pre- 
pared by the State Federation of La- 
bor. This points out that "if the 
legislature is permitted to use the 
power as provided in the constitution 
to amend or repeal a measure after 
it has been passed or upheld by a 
majority vote, then and in that event 
the Initiative and Referendum is nil, 
and only a burden to the statute 
books of the state." The argument 
goes on to say, in answer to the sug- 
gestion that legislators are honest 
and do not need such restrictions, 
that the restrictions "will not make 
them any less honest for there will 
be no incentive to buy the legislature 
if its members cannot deliver the 
goods." In other words, it removes 
the temptation; and it is asserted that 
the last legislature did make at- 
tempts to amend measures which had 
received the approval of the people. 

Four other amendments to the con- 
stitution, which will also be submit- 
ter, are as follows: 

Authorizing a $5,000,000 bond issue 
for a state highway system; authoriz- 
ing- a $5,000,000 bond issue for reclaim- 
ing- arid lands'; prohibiting the sale of 
intoxicating liquors; providing that 
prohibition elections shall not be 
held oftener than once in eight years. 

In addition to these amendments, 
the voters will have their say on ten 
Initiative measures, as follows: 

To provide for an equal system of 
taxation; to prohibit blacklisting by 
employers; creating an old age and 
mothers' pension system; abolishing 
capital punishment; to develop the re- 
sources of the state by means of a 
state banking system, printing plant, 
etc.; providing for semi-annual pay- 
ment of taxes; regulating electrical 
construction; making appropriation 
for the Panama exposition; providing 



Equity 

that 80% of the employees of the 
state must be American citizens. 

Four Referendum measures, also to 
be voted on, deal with an amendment 
of the penal code as to pardons and 
reprieves; an act for the creation of 
new counties; an act to provide for 
changing the county seats; and an 
act regulating the transportation of 
passengers by common carriers with- 
in the state, and prescribing a maxi- 
mum passenger rate in transporting 
passengers in interstate business. 

Arkansas. 



On September 14th at the regular 
state election three constitutional 
amendments and two statutes were 
submitted to the voters of Arkansas, 
two of considerable importance. The 
act prohibiting the employment of 
child labor was the one most talked 
about in the state and throughout 
the country. It carried by a vote of 
about three to one, and provides lhat 
no children under 14 years of age 
may be employed, and none under 15 
in hazardous occupations. Those em- 
ployed between 14 and 16 may not 
work more than eight hours a 
and those between 16 and 18 no more 
than nine hours a day. 

Another act proposed by Initiative 
petition, known as the "Pu 
Act," which carried nearly t 
one, aims to reduce the expenses of 
publishing measures submitted I 
Amendment No. 10 providing for the 
amendment of the constitution by 
popular Initiative. The law thus 
acted by the will of the people pro- 
vides for the publication of all gen- 
eral laws in one newspaper of ea^-h 
county, and similar publication of 
county and municipal enactir 
also all important orders of 
commissions and other admin > 
tive bureaus. The publicity obta 
in this way is to be paid for a: 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



175 



regular advertising rates of the dif- 
ferent papers used. 

One amendment to the constitution 
proposed by Initiative petition, known 
as Amendment No. 14, provides that 
cities and towns may issue municipal 
bonds. This was carried by a vote of 
two to one. It is substantially the 
same measure as was once before 
adopted by a large popular majority, 
but it was later invalidated by a rul- 
ing of the supreme court on the 
technical ground that the constitution 
did not permit the passage of more 
than three amendments at one elec- 
tion. 

Another amendment to the consti- 
tution, referred to the people by the 
legislature and known as Amendment 
No. 15, provided that all members 
of the general assembly shall receive 
a salary, namely $750 for each term 
of two years. Under the amendment 
of 1912, legislators are paid $6 a day 
for a period of 60 days, after which 
if they remain in session, they must 
do so at their own expense. Under 
the new law the salary is payable at 
the rate of $5 a day for the first 100 
days of a regular session, and the 
remainder of the fixed salary is pay- 
able quarterly. This would involve 
an expenditure of more than twice 
the sum previously paid to legisla- 
tors. The amendment was defeated 
by a close vote, the final figures be- 
ing not yet obtainable. 

A third amendment, known as 
Amendment No. 16 and referred to 
the people by the assembly, provided 
for the election of a lieutenant gov- 
ernor, and fixed the amount of his 
salary. This was defeated by a close 
vote. 

California 

When the bare statement is pub- 
lished that 48 measures are to go on 
the ballot in this great coaimon- 



wealth of the Pacific slope, without 
mention of their source, the impres- 
sion might be given to the general 
public, unfamiliar with the California 
Initiative and Referendum amend- 
ment, that all of the measures orig- 
inated with the voters by popular 
petition. How far this is from the 
truth may be readily determined by 
a cursory glance at the official an- 
nouncement of the titles as circulated 
by Secretary of State Jordan. 

There it appears that 22 constitu- 
tional amendments were submitted 
to the voters by resolution of the 
legislature. Similarly originated the 
resolution for a constitutional con- 
vention and four bonding acts. 

Four measures, which were passed 
by the last legislature, have been re- 
ferred to the people by petitions, the 
two more important of which are 
known as the Red Light Abatement 
Act, which held responsible the own- 
ers of property used for vicious pur- 
poses; and the Blue Sky Law, in- 
tended to regulate and supervise the 
various investment companies. 

The more important measures pro- 
posed by Initiative petition are state 
wide prohibition, the universal eight- 
hour labor measure, the proposal to 
limit the right to vote on the issu- 
ance of public bonds to citizens who 
are property owners. 

Since the filing of the petition for 
the universal eight-hour law Attor- 
ney General Webb has rendered his 
opinion that it is unconstitutional be- 
cause it applies to all kinds and con- 
ditions of labor instead of being re- 
stricted to certain classes. Thus he 
finds that it would conflict with that 
section of the 14th Amendment to 
the federal constitution which pro- 
vides that no state shall deprive any 
person of life, liberty or property 
without due process of law. 



176 



Equity 



The complete list of measures to 
appear on the California ballot, in 
the order arranged by the Secretary 
of State in his official pamphlet of 
112 closely printed pages, is as fol- 
lows: 

1 — Convention to revise the 
constitution. 

2 — Prohibition. 

3 — Eight-hour law. 

4 — Abatement of nuisances. 

5 — investment company's* act. 

6 — Water commission act. 

7 — Local taxation exemption. 

8 — Exempting vessels from tax- 



9 — Regulating investment com- 



No. 
state 

No. 

No. 

No. 

No. 

No. 

No. 

No. 
ation. 

No. 
panieS. 

No. 10 — Abolition of poll tax. 

No. 11 — University of California 
bonding act. 

No. 12 — Constitutional conventions. 

No. 13 — Qualifications of electors at 
bonding elections. 

No. 14 — Voting by absent electors. 

No. 15 — Deposit of public moneys. 

No. 16 — Condemnation for public 
purposes. 

No. 17 — Exposition contribution by 
Alameda county. 

No. 18 — Non-sale of game. 

No. 19 — Consolidation of cities. 

No. 20 — Prize fights. 

No. 21 — City and county consolida- 
tion with consent of annexed territory. 

No. 22 — Land title law. 

No. 23 — Elections by plurality, pref- 
erential vote and primary. 

No. 24 — Assembly pay-roll expenses. 

No. 25 — Adoption of the amendment 
of municipal charters. 

No. 26 — Legislative control of irri- 
gation, reclamation and drainage dis- 
tricts. 

No. 27 — Relating to county charters. 

No. 28 — Regulation of public utili- 
ties. 

No. 29 — Incorporation of municipal- 
ities. 

No. 30 — Irrigation districts control- 
ling international water systems. 

No. 31 — Valuation of condemned 
public utilities by the railroad commis- 
sion. 

No. 32 — Election of United States 
Senators'. 

No. 33 — Public utilities in municipal- 
ities. 



No. 34 — Taxation of public property. 

No. 35 — Sacramento building bonds. 

jj 0> 36 — San Francisco building 
bonds. 

No. 37 — State fair ground bonds. 

No. 38 — Los Angeles building bonds. 

No. 39 — Suspension of the prohibi- 
tion amendment. 

No. 40 — Extra sessions of the dis- 
trict court of appeals. 

No. 41 — Miscarriage of justice. 

No. 42 — Place of payment of bonds 
and interest. 

No. 43 — Exempting educational in- 
stitutions from taxation. 

No. 44 — Minimum wage. 

No. 45 — One day rest in seven. 

No. 46 — Drugless physicians. 

No. 47 — Prohibition elections. 

No. 48 — San Francisco harbor bonds. 

Colorado 

A number of important measures 
are to be determined by the voters in 
the Centennial state on election day, 
but the one which directly concerns 
the process of popular government 
is a proposed amendment to the ex- 
isting I. and R. amendment to the 
constitution. Two changes are con- 
templated in the proposed amend- 
ment. First, under Section 1 concern- 
ing the Initiative, it is provided: 
''Whenever any measure initiated un- 
der the authority of this section shall 
be rejected at such election, such 
measure or any other measure of the 
same substance, character or purpose, 
or designed to accomplish the same 
end, either directly or indirectly, and 
either by state legislation or by 
amendment to the Constitution, shall 
not be initiated nor shall any petition 
therefor be filed, for submission at 
any election held within six years 
from the election at which the reject- 
ed measure was submitted." 

And, under the same Section the 
following paragraph is added: 

"If two or more legislative meas- 
ures or amendments to the Constitu- 
adopted at the same election, the 
tion, as the case may be, shall be 
measure or amendment receiving the 
greatest number of affirmative 
shall prevail in all particulars as to 
which there is a conflict." 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



177 



Second, on the list of measures, as 
arranged by the secretary of state, 
comes the proposed amendment en- 
acting state wide prohibition respect- 
ing the manufacture or sale of intox- 
icating liquors, and forbidding the 
importation of same into the state. 

Third, an amendment providing for 
the continuation of a jury trial in 
case one juror is incapacitated and in 
civil cases that three-fourths of the 
number of jurors may find a verdict. 
Also that no person be disqualified 
for jury service on account of sex, 
and that the court may separate tem- 
porarily men from women serving on 
mixed juries. 

Fourth, an amendment giving the 
people the right to require the gover- 
nor to call a special election for the 
purpose of submitting any measures 
or amendments to the constitution 
under the Initiative and Referendum 
when petitioned by 2&\ '< of the quali- 
fied electors, such petitions to be cir- 
culated in the same way as ordinary 
I. and R. petitions; also authorizing 
the governor to call such special elec- 
tion of his own volition, and such 
election to be held at least four 
months before a general election and 
public notice of same to be made at 
least six months in advance. 

Fifth, an act creating a child wel- 
fare committee to prepare a code of 
laws relating to the employment of 
women and children, and naming 
Judge Lindsey of Denver, as being 
selected by the people as the chair- 
man of said committee, and Lillian 
H. Kerr and Josephine A. Roche as 
two other members; all to serve with- 
out compensation. 

Sixth, an act concerning the proba- 
tion of persons proceeded against for 
crime, and providing for the ap- 
pointment of probation officers. 

Seventh, an act to secure better 



highways by increasing the state 
road fund by a levy of half a mill. 

Eighth, an amendment declaring 
that every newspaper printed and 
circulated in the state is "a public 
utility," and that every such business 
of publishing a newspaper is "a pub- 
lic service and effected with a public 
interest;" and that all persons em- 
ployed in such business are engaged 
in a public service and effected with 
a public interest," and therefore are 
subject to all the laws of the state 
relating to the regulation or control 
of public utilities. 

Ninth, an act creating a public 
utilities commission and prescribing 
its powers and duties. 

Tenth, an act providing for the 
licensing and bonding of commission 
merchants. 

Eleventh, an act to relieve em- 
ployees from assuming the risk of 
injury or death from dangers and 
perils in any employment which the 
employer might by ordinary care 
have guarded against, and permitting 
the recovery of damage in case of 
injury or death. 

Twelfth, an act referring to the 
appointment of deputy sheriffs and 
other peace officers. 

Thirteenth, an act to regulate pub- 
lic utility corporations. 

Fourteenth, an act to submit an 
amendment declaring that no city or 
town shall contract any debt by loan 
in any form except by means of an 
ordinance specifying the process to 
which the fund shall be applied, and 
specifying the tax levy therefor and 
requiring that the question be sub- 
mitted to vote of the qualified electors. 

Fifteenth, an act to submit an 
amendment concerning boards of 
equalization. 

Sixteenth, an amendment to permit 
a change in the manner and cost of 



178 



Equity 



publishing constitutional amendments 
and initiated and referred measures. 

Illinois 

The voters of all parties in this 
state, although in the midst of a 
heated senatorial contest, have not 
lost sight of the more fundamental 
issue involved in the revision of an 
outworn constitution. The Republican 
state convention adopted a platform 
in which the demand for the amend- 
ment or general revision of the con- 
stitution of the state was inserted. 
Similar action had already been taken 
by the Democratic and Progressive 
parties. Therefore, it would appear 
to be a moral certainty that the next 
legislature will take the necessary 
steps toward a constitutional conven- 
tion. 

Raymond Robins is making the run 
for the Progressive forces in the 
senatorship fight, as against Sullivan 
for the Democrats and Sherman for 
the Republicans. 

Indiana 

Notwithstanding that all three of 
the principal parties had indorsed the 
proposal for a constitutional conven- 
tion, which is to be submitted to the 
voters at the regular fall election, 
the apathy of the general public 
about this question made it pretty 
evident that the old party state ma- 
chines were not really in favor of it. 
The urgency of this matter was rea- 
lized, however, by a group of influ- 
ential citizens of Fort Wayne, who on 
June 30 met and organized 'The Citi- 
zens' League of Indiana" for the 
avowed purpose of aiding "in a move- 
ment to secure a new constitution for 
Indiana." 

An executive committee of twelve 
leading citizens was chosen and 
headquarters opened at 726 Shoaf 
Building in Fort Wayne. Stiles P. 



Jones, an expert in civic reform at 
Minneapolis, was obtained to take di- 
recting charge of the work and Prof. 
Ross F. Lockridge, of State University, 
was appointed secretary. Quickly the 
movement assumed state-wide pro- 
portions and branch leagues were 
formed in many places. Meetings 
were arranged at which Herbert Big- 
elow and other prominent reform 
leaders spoke. A quantity of print- 
ed matter in advocacy of the conven- 
tion was disseminated to the press 
of the state and mailed to thousands 
of individuals. It is hoped that 
through this means the voters of the 
Hoosier state may yet be aroused 
to the importance of authorizing a 
revision of their antiquated constitu- 
tion. 

The one big obstacle to be overcome 
is the requirement that the measure 
must receive a majority of all the 
votes cast at the election for candi- 
dates. Thus the thousands of igno- 
rant or indifferent voters, who may be 
induced to vote for the candidates of 
some party but who remain silent on 
this great question of improving the 
constitution, will have just as much 
weight against the proposition as 
those who do vote against it. The 
very injustice of this provision, which 
only a few of the state constitutions 
employ, should stir every intelligent 
and earnest citizen of Indiana to join 
in the demand for a new instrument 
not only by casting his vote for the 
convention, but also by getting all his 
friends and acquaintances to go to 
the polls on November 3d to do like- 
wise. 

One of the strongest statements of 
the case for the revision advocates is 
an address delivered by Mr. Theo. F. 
Theme of Fort Wayne, who took a 
leading part in the organization of 
the Citizens' League. This is entitled 






The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



179 



"A New State Constitution for In- 
diana" and has been printed in 
pamphlet for free distribution. This 
pamphlet should be in the hands of 
every Indiana voter who may be in 
doubt about how to vote on this prop- 
osition. 

From one who is taking an active 
part in this campaign for a constitu- 
tional convention in Indiana, we have 
received the following very interest- 
ing diagnosis of the situation: 

"Indiana, politically, is one of the 
most backward of our States. It must 
continue to be, under the ironclad re- 
strictions of the present constitution. 
No progress has been made in several 
decades. The state has remained un- 
touched by the progressive movement 
in the states all around it. It might 
be said to be the one black spot on the 
map of the states North of the Ohio 
River. Note the situation: 

"No Initiative and Referendum; no 
Workmen's Compensation Act, or 
other social labor legislation; cities 
without the power of home rule; the 
obsolete general property tax system 
still in effect; no mandatory direct 
primaries; the suffrage wholly un- 
guarded; the partisan political organ- 
izations in supreme control of affairs, 
making the political standards of the 
people and doing all their thinking 
for them. This is the condition of 
Indiana today under the present con- 
stitution. And meekly yielding to 
the rule of the political machines, 
the citizens of Indiana have been 
content with this situation or, when 
not, have insisted that it was useless 
to expect or to try to secure any 
change in their condition. The ma- 
chines were invulnerable. 

"The opposition did not show its 
hand until early in October, when the 
state was flooded with letters over the 
signature of a reactionary down-state 
country editor, appealing to the 
voters to rise against the menace of 
the new movement, and including 
speeches by a standpat former state 
senator, who assails the movement 
as dangerous to the stability of gov- 
ernment, and as leading the people 
"hell bent" toward a state of so- 



cialism. Listen to his doleful estimate 
of the Initiative, Referendum and Re- 
call: 

"Each one of these alleged remedies 
is not a remedy at all, but a deadly- 
disease, sure to deprive the people of 
their rights and intended only for the 
benefit of immature agitators and dis- 
turbers. The Initiative and Referen- 
dum and Recall are a curse to any 
American community. They enable 
the idle, the disturbers, the knockers, 
the flighty in mind, the unbalanced in 
intellect, the shallow-minded and the 
abnormally morbid and ambitious to 
keep society in a turmoil, while they 
shoot off at the mouth. They destroy 
representative government, and end 
all official responsibility. The Recall 
is intended especially to take gov- 
ernment out of the hands of the sober- 
minded and thoughtful elements of 
and place it in the hands of 
having the largest mouths, the 
loudest voices and the least know- 
ledge. Applied to judicial decisions, it 
end.-- the security of life and property 
ir to Americans, and establishes 
a condition like Mexico has." 

Maryland 

Apparently there is practically no 
opposition to the pending amendment 
providing for the popular Referen- 
dum in Maryland, which was sub- 
mitted by the last legislature to be 
voted on at the election in November. 
Its adoption by the voters seems 
assured. (Digest of this amendment 
in July Equity). 

Massachusetts 

An effort to use the Referendum 
on the Referendum proposition has 
been made by the Democratic and 
labor union officials this fall, proceed- 
ing under a law passed in 1913 "to 
provide for submitting to the voters 
on official ballots questions of public 
policy." It was hoped that in this 
way the voters in many districts of 
the state might give instructions to 
their representatives whether or not 



180 



Equity 



they should favor an Initiative and 
Referendum amendment to the con- 
stitution. Nearly a score of dis- 
tricts were included in the petitions 
filed, but in only four were the re- 
quirements necessary to place the 
question on the ballot fulfilled. The 
requirement of the law is that there 
shall be at least 200 signatures of 
qualified voters in a representative 
district, and at least 1200 such sig- 
natures in a senatorial district. Fur- 
thermore each petition must be certi- 
fied under oath before a justice of the 
peace by one of the persons signing 
it. 

The state democratic convention, 
which met in Boston October 3d, 
adopted a platform renewing its ad- 
vocacy of a constitutional convention, 
its demand for home rule of cities and 
the abolition of party enrollment at 
party elections. 

Michigan. 

Here the voters on election day will 
have the final say as to four proposed 
amendments to the constitution, three 
of which were submitted by the legis- 
ture, as follows: authorizing the 
state to issue bonds for permanent 
highway improvements; authorizing 
counties to issue bonds for the im- 
provement of agricultural lands; and 
securing to students at college the 
right to vote. 

The fourth proposed amendment 
was brought before the people by 
Initiative petition and has stirred up 
much discussion because it seeks to 
apply the principles of the I. and R. 
to the work of fraternal insurance 
beneficiary societies. This would re- 
quire such societies to operate under 
"a representative or a democratic 
form of government" with power to 
change their constitutions by a refer- 
endum to the membership on demand 
of 10 per cent; also to recall officers 



of a company by a majority vote of 
the membership on demand of 15 per 
cent, of the members. It would pro- 
hibit the legislature from requiring 
associations to charge a higher rate 
than it takes to pay death losses in 
legal reserve old line companies. It 
leaves fraternal orders free to have 
lodges or not as they please. But the 
main issue is the granting of majority 
rule of the membership through the 
Initiative and Referendum, which all 
such orders would have to adopt with- 
in one year from the adoption of this 
amendment if they are to be within 
the law of Michigan. Five local 
lodges would have the right to de- 
mand the general mailing list of a 
given order for use in sending out 
petitions to members for signature. 

The city of Detroit has the rare 
opportunity of obtaining as its mayor 
a man of unquestioned ability and in- 
telligence in the person of Mr. Fred- 
erick F. Ingram, who has been nomi- 
nated for that office on the Demo- 
cratic ticket. Mr. Ingram was an ac- 
tive member of the commission which 
formulated a new charter for the 
city and has been long in the fore- 
front of the fight for real self gov- 
ernment. 

Minnesota. 

The I. and R. amendment which the 
privilege-controlled legislature of 1913 
submitted for ratification or rejection 
by the voters at the coming Novem- 
ber election is so far from being 
satisfactory to the real friends of 
popular government that they would 
not mourn very much if it should 
be defeated. For details concerning 
this amendment, see page 124 of the 
April, 1913 Equity. But it is our 
belief that the adoption of this 
amendment, with all its imperfec- 
tions, will make for ultimate pro- 
gress because it commits the state 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



181 



to the principle of legislative re- 
sponsibility to the people. And when 
the people by experience have learn- 
ed that this amendment is full of 
kinks and jokers that render it harm- 
less to the special privilege clique, it 
will then be easier to enact an amend- 
ment to this amendment. But in vot- 
ing for the amendment now before 
the people, every one should have 
his eyes open to its defects. 

Another amendment to be voted on 
at this election has to do with the 
recall of judges and our available 
reports indicate a pretty strong trend 
against this measure. The other big 
topics uppermost in this campaign 
are the suffrage and prohibition 
amendments. 

Mississippi 

So far as we are able to learn from 
those who are in active charge of the 
campaign for the Initiative and Ref- 
erendum amendment, the prospects 
are excellent for success at the No- 
vember election. The People's Rule 
League, under the direction of Rep- 
resentative Mott of Yazoo City, has 
arranged a large number of meetings 
thruout the state, and has kept 
the newspapers well informed on the 
principal issue confronting the vot- 
ers. 

During the summer, Secretary of 
State Bryan wrote a letter to Mr. 
Mott highly commending the Missis- 
sippi I. and R. amendment, saying he 
believed it to be one of the best ever 
submitted. Mr. Bryan said that there 
are only two objections that can be 
honestly made to the Initiative and 
Referendum, one being based upon 
a lack of confidence in the common 
people and the other upon the idea 
that the masses cannot be trusted to 
deal justly with property interests. 
He said that it was easy to show that 
both of these objections are ground- 



less. He had no doubt that a ma- 
jority of those who vote on the pro- 
posed amendment would vote "yes," 
but said that the danger would come 
from the failure of many to vote at 
all on this question. Hence, the ne- 
cessity of an active campaign in or- 
der to arouse the voters. Mr. Bryan 
expressed the desire and intention 
of making a number of speeches be- 
fore election day in Mississippi, pro- 
vided that imperative official duties 
at Washington should not prevent. 
As a further earnest of his deep 
interest in the Mississippi campaign, 
Mr. Bryan had a number of copies of 
the speech which he delivered before 
the constitutional convention of Ohio 
in 1912 sent to Mr. Mott for distri- 
bution. 

In addition to this personal assist- 
ance given by the Secretary of State, 
the friends of the amendment have 
used with considerable effect a letter 
written to the People's Rule League 
by former Governor Donaghey of 
Arkansas. Secretary Mott of the 
League had written the Governor 
asking him what arguments were 
used while he was governor in com- 
bating the opponents of the Arkansas 
amendment. In reply Governor Don- 
aghey wrote as follows: 

"I have yours of recent date, in- 
forming me of your campaign for the 
adoption of the initiative and refer- 
endum in Mississippi and inquirng 
what arguments were brought against 
us, especially as to the negro ques- 
tion and as to whether the people of 
Arkansas are satisfied with having 
adopted the initiative and referendum. 

"During our campaign for the in- 
itiative and referendum in Arkansas 
in 1910, every conceivable argument 
calculated to frighten the voters into 
rejecting these people's rule meas- 
ures was brought against us by the 
reactionary few. 

"We were told that 'legalized an- 
archy would follow its adoption; that 
there would be a 'French revolution'; 



182 



Equity 



that we would 'lapse into barbarism'; 
and, as a crowning absurdity, we were 
warned that with the initiative and 
referendum 'the state would be con- 
trolled by negroes.' My answer to this 
tirade was, and is now, that this is a 
white man's country and white men 
will continue to govern it, and that 
what the predatory corporations, their 
lawyers and politicians feared was the 
white people's intelligence and not 
the negro's ignorance. Also that it 
was foolish to talk about anarchy un- 
less a majority of the people were 
anarchists, since nothing could be 
done to which a majority of the vot- 
ers did not agree and that it was an 
insult to call the voters anarchists. 

"None of these dreadful prophecies 
have come to pass, but the initiative 
and referendum have come to stay 
in Arkansas. The people are well 
satisfied with them and no politician 
who values his reputation dares op- 
pose them. They have done good in 
Arkansas and have just begun their 
great career of usefulness. The closer 
you, can bring a government to 
the people, the better that government 
will be. I sincerely trust that the 
people of Mississippi will not listen 
to the selfish few who desire to rule 
over them, but will adopt the initia- 
tive and referendum so that they shall 
be able to rule themselves." 

Valuable assistance in the Missis- 
sippi campaign has also been ren- 
dered by the Popular Government 
League of Washington, D. C, of 
which Senator Owen is the president 
and Judson King the executive sec- 
retary. 

In addition to the I. and R. amend- 
ment, the voters of Mississippi will 
have the opportunity of ratifying or 
rejecting eight amendments proposed 
by concurrent resolution of the last 
legislature, as follows: Requiring the 
judges of the supreme court to be 
elected by the people; fixing the 
terms of the office of the judges of 
the supreme court at eight years, but 
with terms so arranged that not more 
than a majority of the judgeships 
shall be vacant at any one time; an- 



nulling Section 151 of the constitu- 
tion referring to the appointment of 
judges; increasing the number of su- 
preme court judges to six instead of 
three; where either party shall de- 
sire, the court shall be composed of 
three judges, and in that case "no 
judgment or decree shall be affirmed 
by disagreement of two judges con- 
stitution a quorum;" providing that 
the supreme court may sit for trial 
in cases of two divisions; providing 
that nine or more jurors in civil suits 
may agree on the verdict, and return 
it as a verdict of the jury; making 
a reapportionment of senatorial dis- 
tricts. 

Missouri. 

The popular government spirit is 
active in this great state. Ten con- 
stitutional amendments and referenda 
and four laws passed at the last ses- 
sion of the legislature will be voted 
on at the November election. The 
equal suffrage amendment and the 
county unit law will probably attract 
greatest attention. 

One amendment, however, interests 
us specially here. It is as follows: 
The powers reserved or contained 
in this section as aforesaid shall 
not be used to pass a law or con- 
stitutional amendment authorizing 
any classification of property for the 
purpose of levying the different 
rates of taxation thereon, or of au- 
thorizing the levy of any single tax 
on land or land values or land sites 
at a higher rate or by a different 
rule than is or may be applied to 
improvements thereon, or to person- 
al property, or to authorize or con- 
fer local option or other local pow- 
ers in matters of taxation in or upon 
any of the counties, municipalities, 
or political subdivisions of the State, 
or to repeal, amend, or modify these 
provisions relating to taxation. 

Initiative petitions shall be filed 
with the respective county clerks of 
the respective counties in which the 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



183 



signers thereof reside and vote not 
less than four months before the 
election at which they are to be vot- 
ed upon. Within 30 days after said 
petitions are filed with the re- 
spective county clerks of the re- 
spective counties said initiative peti- 
tions shall be, by said respective 
county clerks, laid before the county 
courts of the respective counties, 
and said petitions shall be examined 
by the respective county courts of 
the respective counties, and if the 
signatures thereto are found to be 
genuine signatures of voters of such 
counties, they shall, at least three 
months before the election at which 
they are to be voted upon, be certi- 
fied by the respective county courts 
of the respective counties to the 
secretary of state. 

This is known as the anti-single tax 
amendment, but it goes much further, 
as can plainly be seen, destroying 
the efficiency of the Initiative on any 
measure. While it is popularly call- 
ed the anti-single tax amendment, it 
is really an anti-I. & R. amendment, 
and as such should be decisively de- 
feated. 

As is well known, this magazine 
takes no position in any economic or 
political question, being devoted en- 
tirely to improved processes and 
methods in government. While we are 
entirely neutral and colorless on 
economic and political questions, we 
were disturbed by the ill-judged im- 
pulsiveness of our friends, the single- 
taxers, rushing prematurely at the 
voters of Missouri with a state-wide 
single tax proposition, so soon after 
the establishment of the I. and R. in 
Missouri. We feared that such im- 
pulsive radicalism would result in an 
attempt to injure the I. and R. sys- 
tem in Missouri, and this is just what 
has occurred. 

We do not wish anyone to think 
that the I. and R. movement, as pro- 
moted by this magazine, its special 



organ, has any connection with the 
single-tax, socialism, equal suffrage, 
nor any other economic nor political 
idea whatever, either to favor or to 
oppose. But thousands of voters in 
Missouri, unfortunately link the I. 
and R. and single-tax together. The 
I. and R. taken together are simply 
a neutral, colorless, cold-blooded pro- 
cess thru which the people must get 
whatever they want when they want 
it, and to veto anything that they do 
not want. The voters of Missouri said 
by an overwhelming majority that 
they do not want the single-tax. They 
have shown their ability to reject 
what they do not want; and should 
not this inspire them with confidence 
in themselves? 

The voters of Missouri now face 
the danger of self-condemnation — of 
saying that they cannot trust them- 
selves. They also face the danger of 
vital injury to their charter of liber- 
ty, and of humiliating themselves be- 
fore the entire country by declaring 
that they will never be able to trust 
themselves. Will the voters of Mis- 
souri make a declaration so injurious 
to their own protection? — a declara- 
tion that they would not permit oth- 
ers to make? 

While Equity is not devoted to any 
theory of taxation, it does stand firm- 
ly for home rule in taxation as well as 
home rule in everything else. This 
amendment strikes directly at home 
rule in taxation, as well as at state 
rule in taxation, and at the efficiency 
of the I. and R. in Missouri. Thus 
there is every reason why it should 
be defeated. The adoption of this 
amendment would be an admission 
on the part of Missouri voters that 
they are not fit, and never will be fit, 
to trust themselves. Can any voter 
in Missouri afford to take such a 
self-outraging position? We hope 
not. 



184 



Equity 



The new charter of St. Louis went 
into operation, August 23d. Under 
the terms of the new charter, Mayor 
Kiel appoints the following "new" 
city officials: Four Directors of 
Board of Public Service, three Direc- 
tors of Efficiency Board, three mem- 
bers of Complaint Board, without 
salary. The remaining appointments 
will be made from the present city 
officials or employees as provided in 
the charter. 

Mayor Kiel will hold office until 
April, 1917, when the first new char- 
ter mayorality election will be held. 
The present House of Delegates and 
City Council will be abolished the 
first Tuesday in April, 1915, when a 
new Charter Board of Aldermen, con- 
sisting of 28 men, one nominated 
from each ward, but all elected at 
large, and a President of this Board, 
will be elected. All other present 
officials will hold office until 1917 
when the Mayor will have the ap- 
pointment of all such officers who are 
now elected. The only exception is 
the Comptroller who will be elected 
in 1917. The present Comptroller 
will hold office until then. 

The charter contains provisions for 
the Initiative, Referendum and Re- 
call. For particulars, see page 140 of 
the July Equity. 

Montana. 

Ever since the Initiative and Refer- 
endum amendment to the constitution 
of Montana was adopted at the gen- 
eral election of 1906, doubts have 
been cast on its validity, because of 
failure to follow literally the pro- 
cedure for amendment, altho a num- 
ber of important measures have been 
enacted under its provisions. On 
July 16th the supreme court of Mon- 
tana, in a unanimous opinion, sus- 
tained the validity of this amendment. 
The court found that altho there had 



not been literal compliance with the 
provisions of the law in the procedure 
for the adoption of the amendment, 
there had been substantial compli- 
ance; and the will of the people as 
expressed at the polls must be re- 
garded as a factor of paramount im- 
portance in effecting a change of the 
constitution. On this point the de- 
cision contained this significant pass- 
age: 

"The proper proposal of the amend- 
ment by the legislature and the will 
of the people expressed at the polls in 
favor of such amendment are clearly 
emphasized as the factors of para- 
mount importance in effecting a 
change of our constitution. Whatever 
may be said of the rigidity with which 
the rules of law must be drawn, when- 
ever either of these paramount fac- 
tors is in issue, we are clearly of the 
opinion that any question which may 
arise upon other features of the 
amending process is referable to the 
rule of substantial compliance, 
tho the provisions of the constitution 
invoked is mandat* 

This decision grew out of proceed- 
ings, instituted by the boxing clubs 
of the state, to restrain the Secre- 
tary of State from taking the steps 
necessary to refer to the people the 
Kiley Boxing Law passed by the last 
legislature. Because of this decision, 
the Kiley Law and three Initiative 
measures are to go on the ballots for 
decision by the voters on November 
3d. These three measures are the 
farmer loan act, the bill to consoli- 
date state institutions, and a labor 
compensation act. 

When the case came before the 
highest court, the People's Power 
League defended the constitutional- 
ity of the I. and R. amendment thru 
the voluntary services of a number of 
prominent lawyers. Attorney Gen- 
eral Kelly only a short time before 
this had prepared an opinion holding 
that the amendment was not consti- 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 185 

It will be sent 



tutional, but before he had the oppor- 
tunity to pass upon it officially, the 
court proceedings were begun. 

Nebraska. 

There are many signs of progress 
and alertness among the people of 
Nebraska this year. At the coming 
election the voters will have the op- 
portunity to render their final deci- 
sion on seven propositions. The list 
is as follows: 

I — Constitutional Amendments Sub- 
mitted by the Legislature: 

1. Raising the salary of the gov- 
ernor and other state executives. 

2. Eliminating the rule of uni- 
formity in taxation. 

3. Permitting three-fourths jury 
verdict in Civil rases. 

II — Constitutional Amendment Pro- 
posed by Initiation: 

4. Qivinjg VOte* to women. 

Ill — Laws on Which Referendum Was 

Invoked : 

Workmen's compensation tor 
Industrial accidents. 

6. Appropriation t.. construct an 
armor] st Nebraska City. 

IV — Alternative dum Ordered 

by the Legislature: 

7. Consolidation ol state univer- 
sity and agricultural coll. 
surburban site at Lincoln or 
continued separation l.y reten- 
tion of downtown campus. 

Notwithstanding that an amend- 
ment proposed in the last legislature 
arranging for the use of a publicity 
pamphlet in connection with Initiative 
and Referendum measures failed of 
adoption, and that the governor has 
distributed the various announce- 
ments of the pending measures as 
advertisements in the newspapers of 
the state, as provided for by the con- 
stitution, the Secretary of State has 
issued a 50-page booklet containing 
arguments for and against three of 
the measures to be voted upon, name- 
ly, numbers 4, 5 and 7 in above list. 
The expense of this booklet is borne 
in part by those using its space, and 



in part by the state, 
to 255,000 voters. 

Thru the courtesy of Director A. 
E. Sheldon of the Nebraska Legisla- 
tive Reference Bureau, at Lincoln, 
Nebraska, we have received a copy of 
a very interesting and important re- 
port prepared by the Joint Commit- 
tee of Senate and House, recommend- 
ing various reforms of legislative 
procedure and budget. To all legis- 
lators and students of legislative 
procedure this report must be ex- 
tremely valuable. Among its recom- 
mendations for immediate adoption 
are uniformity in the size and style 
of bills; the creation of a bill-draft- 
ing division of the Legislative Refer- 
ence Bureau, similar to that now at 
work in Wisconsin; and a rule re- 
quiring that members of the legisla- 
ture shall introduce only such bills 
as they are willing to defend before 
the committees and upon the floor. 
It is also proposed to have commit- 
tees meet more frequently and regu- 
larly, and to require greater economy 
in the employment of labor. 

Chief among the recommendations 
for future action is the question of a 
single legislative body. On this point 
the report says: 

"We recommend to the electors of 
NVbraska the amendment of our con- 
stitution so as to provide for one 
house of the legislature instead of 
two, the one house to be composed of 
a membership in number between the 
present number of the senate and of 
the house, elected one from each dis- 
trict of the state, districts to be based 
upon population, compact in size and 
shape and composed as nearly as pos- 
sible of people having close business 
and social relations. We recommend 
the submission of such an amendment 
to the people by initiative petition to 
be voted upon in November, 1916, and 
that the next session of the legisla- 
ture take such action, by committee 
appointed to draft the form of such 
petition and amendment, or otherwise, 



186 



Equity 



as shall promote the submission and 
adoption of such amendment.'' 

This report also contains an in- 
structive table showing the number 
of bills passed by different state 
legislatures in the past five years, 
and the states which furnish a de- 
partment for bill-drafting, with in- 
formation as to what percentage of 
bills are so drafted, and whether 
members are charged for this service 
or not. 

New York. 

All doubt as to the validity of the 
special election of April 7th, which 
by a small majority ordered a consti- 
tutional convention to be held in 
1915, was removed when the courts 
refused to enjoin officials from pre- 
paring ballots for the election of dele- 
gates for that convention. The dis- 
covery of a clerical error in 1}he 
counting of the ballots in Brooklyn, 
which added 1000 votes to the affirm- 
ative side and made the total ma- 
jority for the convention 2253 instead 
of 1253, served as an obstacle to fur- 
ther contesting of that election by the 
Citizens' Union. It tended to offset 
the illegal ballots discovered in one 
of the Tamany wards, on which the 
question of validity was based. 

The principal political parties of 
the state have made an effort to se- 
lect men of distinction and ability to 
make up their lists of candidates for 
fifteen delegates-at-large to the 
forthcoming convention, which lists 
are to go on the ballots in the re- 
spective party columns. This effort 
to select capable men was in part due 
to the influence of a special commit- 
tee organized as the constitutional 
convention committee of New York 
City, of which Raymond B. Fosdick 
is chairman. Mr. Fosdick is quoted 
as saying that with a few exceptions 
the candidates for delegates-at-large 



are men of training and ability; but 
he calls attention to the fact that the 
nominations for district delegates 
thruout the city and state are not of 
the same calibre. He asserts that 
these candidates are in most cases 
chosen on account of their political 
connections or influence rather than 
because of special ability or training. 

Both the Republican and the Demo- 
cratic conventions, as well as that of 
the Progressives, have now taken a 
decided stand in favor of the Short 
Ballot idea; but the Republican plat- 
form alone contains a plank specific- 
ally condemning the Initiative, Refer- 
endum and Recall. Both Democratic 
and Republican platforms have planks 
against the Recall of judges and 
judicial decisions. 

Attorney General Carmody gave it 
as his opinion that women's names 
might be placed on the ballots as del- 
egates to the constitutional conven- 
tion. This did not carry with it, 
however, the definite right of women 
to sit in that convention as delegates. 
The Attorney General said that that 
question would have to be decided 
by the convention itself, which is the 
sole judge of the qualifications of its 
members. The opinion was rendered 
in response to an inquiry made by 
Mrs. Carrie Chapman Catt, chairman 
of the State Suffrage Association. 
Subsequently a woman's committee 
for representation in the constitu- 
tional convention was organized, and 
this committee selected 18 women as 
candidates for delegates-at-large. 

The primary election on September 
28th, under the new direct primary 
law, resulted in the choice of the 
candidates favored by the different 
party organizations; and this fact 
has been used by some critics of the 
new law as illustrating its futility, 
but it is fair to presume that the in- 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 187 



experience of the voters with the new 
system and the great length of the 
ballot had much to do with this re- 
sult. Every enrolled voter at this 
primary election, who wished to vote 
a complete ticket, had to make from 
35 to 50 separate and distinct X- 
marks on his ballot. It was this con- 
dition of affairs that led to much fa- 
vorable discussion of the Short Ballot 
as one of the needed reforms. 

North Dakota. 

This state is not an I. and R. state. 
Also it is one of the states that re- 
quire proposed constitutional amend- 
ments to pass two consecutive legis- 
latures before reaching the people. 
And yet six quite lengthy amend- 
ments will go on the ballot this year, 
and the female suffrage question will 
be submitted on a separate ballot. 
The point we make here is, don't 
blame the I. and R. for this. But the 
people of North Dakota are entirely 
able to intelligently consider and de- 
cide upon these issues. 

One of these amendments grants 
the statutory I. and R. The required 
percentage is ten, but the required 
distribution is bad: "in a majority of 
the counties of this state." Another 
provides for the constitutional Initia- 
tive but it is not practical, as the re- 
quired percentage is twenty-five, "in 
not less than one-half of the counties 
of the state." It is a question among 
friends of the I. and R. whether it 
is better to vote for these amend- 
ments, or to defeat them with the 
hope of getting better ones submit- 
ted, particularly the latter one. 

The Secretary of States writes us 
that of the remaining four amend- 
ments, the one relating to state aid 
for highways and the one permitting 
the classification of property for tax- 
ation are considered the most import- 
ant. The other two are: to authorize 



state grain elevators, and one relat- 
ing to the blind asylum. 

Ohio 

The two big questions upon which 
the voters of Ohio will render a de- 
cision on election day are the pro- 
posed state-wide prohibition amend- 
ment to the constitution and the 
granting of the suffrage to women. 
The contest over these two measures 
has tended to break down strict party 
lines; and the fact that at least three 
sets of candidates are in the field 
with an aggressive following makes 
the outcome extremely uncertain. 

The city of Toledo will vote on the 
adoption of a new charter prepared 
by a special charter commission 
elected last year. In an address to the 
people this commission says that the 
proposed charter is designed to give 
the people home rule so far as the 
state constitution will permit. It pro- 
vides for nonpartisan primaries and 
elections. The voters will use the 
short ballot, under which the choice 
of only three officers will be made. 
Legislative power is vested in a coun- 
cil of sixteen. The entire executive 
power is vested in the mayor, who 
appoints all department chiefs. All 
elective officials are made subject to 
Recall. The Initiative is made avail- 
able by a petition signed by 20% of 
the voters; and the Referendum on 
measures passed by the council is 
available by a 15% petition. . The 
compulsory Referendum is applied to 
measures for public improvements 
involving the expenditure of $500,000 
or over, or for the granting of a gen- 
eral public franchise. Municipal own- 
ership of public utilities is provided 
for without qualification. There is 
to be a city journal to contain the 
public notices and a record of the 
proceedings of the council. The 
labor for city employees is not to 



188 

exceed eight hours a day except in 
emergency. Amendment of the char- 
ter may be Initiated either by two- 
thirds of the council or by a 20% 
petition of voters. 

On July 14th the city of Cincin- 
nati rejected its proposed new charter 
by a vote of 27,823 to 21,253. A sep- 
arate proposition for the Recall of 
officials, which depended upon the 
adoption of the charter, received 21,- 
849 votes in favor and 25,287 
against. The charter had been framed 
by a commission friendly to the 
traction and other corporation inter- 
ests, and contained a number of pro- 
visions which were immediately rec- 
ognized as jokers. For instance, the 
municipal ownership proposition was 
made to depend on the receipt of a 
two-thirds affirmative vote of the peo- 
ple. Hence the defeat of this charter, 
altho it contained a number of nomi- 
nal reform measures, was not dis- 
pleasing to the progressive forces of 
the city. 

We have received the following let- 
ter, correcting an error! of state- 
ment in the July issue of Equity, and 
gladly give space to it: 

Editor of "Equity:" In your issue 
of July 1914 on page 144 you state 
that Columbus has* adopted the Com- 
mission form of government. In this 
you are in error. We have not adopted 
the Commission form of government, 
but a modification of the Federal Plan. 
We have a council of seven, elected at 
large, performing legislative duties 
only. The executive department will 
be under the control of the mayor 
who is elected by the people. The 
City Attorney and City Auditor are 
likewise elective officers. Legislative, 
executive and judicial functions are 
carefully separated. We have how- 
ever the Initiative, Referendum and 
Recall. 

Respectfully yours, 

M. A. GEMUNDER, 
President of the Charter Commission 



Equity 

Oregon 

This year's campaign in Oregon 
has to do with a number of measures 
highly important to the common- 
wealth in one way or another. Of the 
29 measures on the ballot, 20 origi- 
nated by Initiative petitions, the leg- 
islature having submitted 10. Five of 
the 29 concern taxation; two of these 
would give the power of different 
rates on different classes of property; 
one is a surtax on all land assessed 
at over $25,000 value belonging to 
one person. Then there is the $1,500 
home tax exemption bill which ex- 
empts the improvements, personal 
property, live stock, etc., "used in the 
maintaining of a home or the gain- 
ing of a livelihood." 

For the first time since the Initia- 
tive was put in operation in Oregon, 
the Socialists have submitted a meas- 
ure. It is entitled, "The Right to 
Work" bill, and gives the State 
Labor Commissioner the right to em- 
ploy any citizen demanding work, 
and making available a fund derived 
from an inheritance tax on estates of 
over $50,000. But the issue which has 
caused the greatest amount of dis- 
cussion is undoubtedly the proposed 
amendment for state-wide prohibi- 
tion. Another amendment would re- 
peal the so-called home rule amend- 
ment to the constitution adopted in 
1910 providing that for incorporated 
cities the exclusive powers to license, 
regulate or suppress the sale of in- 
toxicating liquors is vested in such 
municipalities. 

Among the more important meas- 
ures submitted by the last legislature 
are the following: 

Repealing the provision giving a 
vote to a person of foreign birth who 
has lived six months in the state. 
and has declared his intention of be- 
coming a citizen; creating the office 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



189 



of lieutenant governor to be elected 
first in 1918 and every four years 
thereafter. 

Declarations for the constitutional 
amendment abolishing the state sen- 
ate and providing for Proportional 
Representation in the assembly have 
been made by the Federation of 
Labor, the Farmers' Union, Farmers' 
Society of Equity, Proportional Rep- 
resentation Bureau, People's Power 
League and the Oregon State Grange. 

Another proposed amendment pro- 
vides that members of the assembly 
shall receive $5 a day for each work- 
ing day of a session, but not to ex- 
ceed $300 for any session, and not to 
exceed $125 for a special session, 
with the allowance of mileage at 10c 
a mile going to and returning from 
the capital. The present rate of com- 
pensation to legislators is $3 a day 
for both regular and special sessions. 

Pennsylvania 

Administrative officials of the cities 
of the third-class, which have been 
under the modified commission form 
of government in this state since the 
first of the year, held a sort of fam- 
ily "confab" at Meadville August 25- 
27. There they compared notes and 
swapped opinions concerning the 
value of the new system. A. M. 
Fuller, President of the Allied Civic 
Bodies of the state, delivered an ad- 
dress containing a complete report 
from all of the 28 cities of the third- 
class on five definite questions. On 
the general question as to the success 
of the new form, 22 cities replied in 
the affirmative, three in the negative 
and three noncommittal. Twenty-one 
cities reported that the citizens were 
pleased generally with the new sys- 
tem; twenty-three said that it had 
tended to create more interest in city 
affairs on the part of the citizens; 



twenty-one gave it as their opinion 
that the general-manager plan would 
render the system still more efficient; 
seven opposed this. 

James A. Gardiner, City Solicitor 
of New Castle, Pa., read a paper on 
the defects in the Initiative and Ref- 
erendum provisions of the Clark Law. 
He thought that the Referendum pro- 
vision was ambiguous, contradictory, 
inapplicable and so difficult of con- 
struction that the entire section 
should be rewritten. The Initiative 
provision he found to be ''too broad," 
and particularly took exception to the 
privilege granted, or at least not for- 
bidden, that voters may attack even 
emergency measures of the city 
council, after the expiration of the 
ten-day limit for Referendum, by ob- 
taining the requisite number of 
signers to an Initiative petition. Re- 
ferring to the measures of public 
peace, health and safety which are 
exempted from the Referendum, Mr. 
Gardiner said: 

"If then they are not subject to the 
Referendum, are they to be subject 
to the Initiative? In other words, af- 
ter they are passed and become valid 
ordinances, can the electors turn 
around and, by an Initiative proceed- 
ing-, subject them to a vote of the peo- 
ple, to cause their repeal, when they 
could not encompass the same object 
by a Referendum vote?" 

He thinks that the same question 
would apply to other measures 
against which Referendum proceed- 
ings may have failed. We do not 
know what discussion there may have 
been in the conference on this point, 
but on its face the objection appears 
to be more theoretical than practical. 
Certainly so under the restrictions 
which the Clark Law has thrown 
about the operations of both the 
Initiative and Referendum. The pos- 
sibility of obtaining an Initiative 



190 



Equity 



petition against a legitimate emer- 
gency measure would seem to be very 
remote in any case; and if the elec- 
torate had already failed to obtain 
enough signers against any ordin- 
ance, the very fact of that failure 
would tend to lesson the chance of 
their attacking the same subject 
within a short time by the Initiative. 
However, in any event it would be 
for the voters of a community to ex- 
press their will thru the channel pro- 
vided, and to take the consequences 
of their own action, thus learning by 
their own experience. 

Thru the experience of the people 
of Reading, where an unsuccessful 
effort was made to refer an ordin- 
ance for the annexation of several 
suburbs in September, attention has 
been drawn to one of the serious lim- 
itations of the Clark Law in respect 
to the Initiative and Referendum. 
The impression had been general that 
citizens could attack this ordinance 
as they had done in the matter of the 
paid fire department question early 
in the year (see July Equity, page 
146). It was found that the Initiative 
and Referendum could be invoked on- 
ly once in six months, and that clause 
was raised as a bar to further pro- 
ceedings; but aside from that, it was 
also discovered that the law limited 
the operation of the Initiative and 
Referendum to legislation of an ex- 
traordinary character, and this might 
be interpreted differently by different 
officials. Acting on the opinion of 
the city solicitor the city clerk ignor- 
ed the petition filed against the an- 
nexation ordinance. The movement 
was put on foot to have the whole 
matter referred to the state's legal 
advisers in order to determine what 
measures are liable to Initiative or 
Referendum proceedings. 



Texas 

The I. and R. amendment as it was 
reported by the committee to the Sen- 
ate was a very good one in many 
respects, but before it was finally 
passed it was injuriously amended. 
So the amendment, as it will be sub- 
mitted to the voters, November 3d, 
is not one that stirs the enthusiasm 
of the friends of the I. and R. This 
is unfortunate. Some experienced 
friends of the movement think that 
its adoption will put back the cause 
of popular government in Texas for 
many years. If it should be rejected, 
the enemies will loudly claim that 
the voters of Texas do not want the 
I. and R. 

This is the dilemma. We do not 
feel inclined to be dogmatic either 
way. But we do feel that the voters 
of Texas, sooner or later, will insist 
on having the I. and R. in a form in 
which the system will be practical and 
useful. If the amendment now pro- 
posed should be adopted, a movement 
to amend the amendment must be 
started. Indeed that kind of a move- 
ment would be proper in several 
states that have unworkable I. and R. 
amendments. The people should in- 
sist that a bad amendment shall not 
stand in the way of a good amend- 
ment. 

Washington 

The men and women of Washington 
are deeply absorbed in the discussion 
of ten measures on which they are to 
vote on November 3d, but we are in- 
formed that even greater interest is 
being taken in the election of three 
judges of the supreme court. Late 
in the campaign the Joint Legislative 
Committee of the Direct Legislation 
League, Federation of Labor, Farm- 
ers' Union and Grange made a whirl- 
wind canvass for three men whom 
they felt that the voters could trust, 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



191 



namely Wm. H. Pemberton, Former 
Supreme Court Judge, of Bellingham; 
Edgar G. Mills, former government 
attorney; and 0. R. Holcomb, former 
supreme court judge of Ritzville. On 
the sample ballot circulated by the 
Joint Committee was printed the 
following advice to voters: 

"Government by Courts 

The Supreme Court can take away 
your Constitutional rights, it can 
cancel your initiative laws, it can re- 
duce and set aside the verdicts of 
your juries and defeat justice on fine 
technicalities of law. Your redress 
is to elect men who are not reaction- 
ary, men who favor social and indus- 
trial justice." 

Miss Lucy R. Case, Executive Sec- 
retary of the Joint Committee, says: 
"We consider this change in the 
court more important just now than 
our other matters. The time is ripe 
for it; and if we can get this opening 
wedge in our court, we shall have ac- 
complished something in the way of 
relief." 

This Committee in conjunction with 
the Progressive party has made a 
special fight to pledge candidates for 
the legislature to a bill providing for 
the right of the people to amend 
their constitution by the Initiative. 
Where candidates for the legislature 
failed to sign the pledge offered to 
them, this was construed to mean 
that they were opposed to granting to 
the people this right to amend their 
constitution. 

The seven Initiative measures which 
are to be on the ballot are as follows: 

Providing for state-wide prohibi- 
tion. 

The so-called "Blue Sky" law, which 
describes conditions under which 
stock in corporations may and may 
not be sold. 

To abolish the State Bureau and In- 
spection and Supervision of Public 
Offices. 

To abolish all private employment 
agencies. 



An amendment to the industrial in- 
surance law, by which a system of 
"first aid" for the injured is provided. 

The employment of all able-bodied 
convicts on the public roads and ap- 
propriates* $2,000,000 for carrying the 
act into operation. 

The establishment of a universal 
eight-hour day in the state, in all 
industries and avenues of employment. 

In addition to the Initiative meas- 
ures there are two Referendum bills 
referred back to the people by the last 
Legislature. One of these provides 
for a teachers' pension fund. The 
other provides for the issue of $40,- 
000,000 in state bonds for the pur- 
pose of establishing an irrigation pro- 
ject in the Quincy valley. 

There is only one proposed amend- 
ment to the constitution. This pro- 
hibits ownership of lands by aliens 
except under certain restrictions. 

Wisconsin 

This progressive state is rather 
late in getting the I. and R. The 
amendment to be voted on November 
3d is a fairly good one, and should 
be adopted by a large majority. How- 
ever, the Democratic convention at 
Madison, September 15 disapproved 
the amendment; and Emanuel L. 
Philipp, the Republican candidate for 
governor, strongly opposes it. It is 
a good thing that the voters will have 
an opportunity to express their opin- 
ions directly upon a matter so im- 
portant. 

And here we are reminded that no 
political leader nor any party has ev- 
er come out in opposition to the 
nation-wide custom of submitting con- 
stitutions and constitutional amend- 
ments to a direct vote. We merely 
want this power extended a little 
further. 

Ten amendments will be submitted, 
as follows: 

1. "For amendment to section 1 of 
article XII authorizing changes in 



192 



Equity 



or addition to the constitution by a 
vote of the people after being sub- 
mitted to the people by three-fifths 
of the members elected to both houses 
of the legislature." 

2. "For amendment to section 1 of 
article IV, providing for the initiative 
and referendum and giving to the 
people the power by their votes to 
enact, adopt or reject laws or pro- 
posed laws." 

3. "For amendment creating sec- 
tion 11 of article VIII, permitting in- 
surance by the state and providing 
that the state may grant annuities 
with an annual accounting a separa- 
tion and safe guarding of all insurance 
funds." • 

4. "For amendment creating sec- 
tion 3a of article XI, giving to the 
people of cities and villages the right 
of home rule." 

5. "For amendment to sections 6 
and 7 of article VII, authorizing the 
legislature to decrease the number of 
judicial circuits and to provide for 
judges in the several circuits." 

6. "For amendment to article XIII, 
giving to the people the right to recall 
any elective officer except judicial of- 
ficer." 

7. "For amendment creating sec- 
tion 3d of article XI, defining the 
property which may be taken by 
municipal corporation for public pur- 
poses." 

8. "For amendment creating sec- 
tion 3, of article XII, requiring the 
legislature upon petition to submit 
constitutional amendments to the peo- 
ple for adoption or rejection." 

9. "For amendment creating sec- 
tion 13 of article VIII, permitting the 
state to provide for state insurance 
with an annual accounting and separ- 
ation and safeguarding of all insur- 
ance funds." 

10. "For amendment of section 21 
of article IV, changing the compensa- 
tion of members of the legislature to 
six hundred dollars per year and de- 
creasing the mileage allowance." 

Five other proposals to amend the 
constitution were passed by the leg- 
islature of 1913 for reference to the 
legislature in 1915 and submission (if 
passed in 1915) at the election of 1916. 
They provide respectively for state 
bond issues, tax exemptions, water- 
way and forestry development, state 
printing plant and retention forever 
by the state of title to lands bordering 
on streams or lakes. 



P. R. NOTES. 

For the second time since its adopt- 
ion for the purpose P. R. was used in 
April for the election of both houses 
of the Riksdag or parliament of 
Sweden. In Belgium P. R. was ap- 
plied to the election of the Chamber of 
Deputies for the eighth time in May. 



At the meeting of the Irish Trades 
Union Congress in June a resolution 
was offered to the effect that in or- 
der to secure real majority rule in 
the government of the people, pro- 
portional representation was essential 
and should be incorporated in any Act 
dealing with electoral reform in any 
part of the United Kingdom. The 
motion was carried by 41 votes to 6. 



In June the Hare system of P. R. 
was used for the election of the Cen- 
tral Council of the Metropolitan 
Counties branch of the British Med- 
ical Association and for that of the 
Executive Committee of the (British) 
National Union of Clerks. 



The Secretaries of the League are 
very glad to be able to announce that 
the Rt. Hon. Earl Grey, ex-Governor 
General of Canada, the president of 
the Proportional Representation So- 
ciety of Great Britain, has accepted 
their invitation to be one of the hon- 
orary vice-presidents of the American 
P. R. League. Lord Grey has been 
a staunch supporter of proportional 
representation for a great many 
years. 



The methods of government, in this 
imperfect world of ours, certainly need 
the attention of our best talents. The 
wholesale murder by machinery under 
governmental authority now going 
on in Europe cries aloud for better 
methods of government, under which 
such barbarism cannot occur. Our 
states need new constitutions to pro- 
mote greater efficiency and integrity 
in their government. Our cities are 
rapidly making new and better char- 
ters. The mending of methods in govern- 
ment is the most important and the most 
inspiring work now before humanity. 



193 
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION REVIEW 

Official Organ of the American Proportional Representation League 

Edited by C. G. Hoag, General Secretary of the League, Haverford, Pa. (June 10th till 
October 1st, Tamworth, N. H.) 

OFFICERS OF THE LEAGUE 

President, William Dudley Foulke 
Vice-Presidents, Prof. John R. Commons 
William S. U'Ren 
Mrs. Louis F. Post 
Honorary Vice-Presidents, The Rt. Hon. Earl Grey, Ex-Governor General of Canada 

The Rt. Hon. Lord Courtney of Penwith, England 

John H. Humphreys, Secretary of the Proportional Representation Society, London 

Count Goblet d'Alviella, Vice-President of the Senate, Belgium 

Professor E. J. Nanson, University of Melbourne, Australia 

Council 



Charles Francis Adams, Massachusetts 
Charles Frederick Adams... New York 

Felix Adler New York 

Dr. J. F. Baldwin Ohio 

W. E. Boynton Ohio 

Richard S. Child* New York 

Stoughton Cooley Illinois 

Alfred D. Cridge Oregon 

Horace E. Deming New York 

Rev. Charles P. Dole. . .Massachusetts 
George H. Duncan ....New Hampshire 

John E. Eastmond New York 

John H. Gabriel Colorado 

Dr. Lucius F. C. Garvin. .Rhode Island 

William H. Gove .Massachusetts 

Jane E. Harnett California 

Paxton Hibben Indiana 

William Hoak Massachusetts 

Jeremiah W. Jenks New York 



Daniel Kiefer Ohio 

Charles McCarthy Wisconsin 

Robert L. Owen Oklahoma 

Robert Treat Paine Massachusetts 

Kltweed Pomeroy Texas 

Jackson H. Ralston, Washington, D. C. 

Daniel S. Remsen New York 

Linton Satterthwaite .... New Jersey 
J. Henry Scattergood . . Pennsylvania 

J. S. Schaplro New York 

Isaac Sharpless Pennsylvania 

Lieut. C. P. Shaw Virginia 

Moorfield Storey Massachusetts 

Dr. C. F. Taylor Pennsylvania 

Carl D. Thompson Illinois 

DeLancey Verplanck New York 

John M. Vincent Maryland 

Thomas Raeburn White, Pennsylvania 
Charles Zeublin Massachusetts 



General Secretary-Treasurer, C. G. Hoag, Haverford, Pa. 
(June 10th till October 1st, Tamworth, N. H.) 

Secretary-Treasurer for Canada, Robert Tyson, 20 Harbord Street, Toronto. 



Proportional Representation 

A General Statement with Special Refer- 
ence 'o the National House of Rep- 
resentatives 
The object of the League is to se- 
cure the adoption, for the election of 
our city councils, our State legisla- 
tures, and our national House of Rep- 
resentatives, of a reasonable system 
of representation. 

Under the system generally in use 
in the United States and Canada, a 
district that is to send into the legis- 
lative body a number of representa- 
tives, say nine, is divided into nine 
constituencies geographically, and each 



of these constituencies is required to 
be "represented" by one person in 
spite of the fact that the voters of 
such a constitutency are not united at 
all in respect to the sort of person 
they want to be represented by. A rea- 
sonable system of representation, on 
the other hand, would divide a dis- 
trict that was to have nine represent- 
atives not into nine constituencies 
geographically united and politically 
disunited but into nine constituencies 
politically united though geographically 
somewhat distributed. 

Our unreasonable present system 
results in a large percentage of the 



194 



Equity 



voters of a constituency, frequently- 
even an absolute majority of them, 
being ''represented" by a person to 
whom they are utterly opposed and 
whom they have voted against; it 
makes votes vary in value greatly 
according to whether they are on one 
side or the other of a constituency- 
line; it puts a premium on political 
trickery and is the cause of gerry- 
mandering; and it therefore makes 
the true representation of the voters 
in our legislative bodies, which is in- 
dispensable to the highest welfare of 
a democracy, practically impossible. 
A reasonable system of representa- 
tion, that is, the unanimous-constitu- 
ency or "proportional" system, would 
make the representation of the voters 
in our legislative bodies nearly per- 
fect. 

As H. G. Wells wrote in a recent 
article on "The Disease of Parlia- 
ments, proportional representation "is 
not the substitution of something 
for something else of the same na- 
ture; it is the substitution of right 
for wrong. It is the plain common 
sense of the greatest difficulty in con- 
temporary affairs." In making up a 
body whose business it is to make 
political decisions on behalf of all the 
voters it is right to condense the 
voters into constituencies on political 
lines, as the proportional system does, 
and wrong to condense them on mere- 
ly geographical lines, as our pres- 
ent system does. 

Where in Use 
What countries are using propor- 
tional representation for the election 
of parliamentary chambers or for 
provincial, cantonal, or municipal 
councils? Belgium, Sweden, Den- 
mark, Finland, Switzerland (nine 
cantons), Japan, Bulgaria, Servia, the 
Union of South Africa, the Transvaal, 
Tasmania, and the German states of 



Hamburg, Wiirtemberg, Baden, Old- 
enburg, and Bavaria. 

Success of P. R. 

What is thought of the system in 
these countries? The following quo- 
tations supply the answer. 

Count Goblet d'Alviella, Vice-Pres- 
ident of the Belgian Senate: "A signif- 
icant fact is that none of the coun- 
tries, nor even of the parties which 
have tasted of P. R., have ever re- 
turned to the flesh-pots of the ma- 
jority system. In Belgium, where the 
first man who spoke in parliament of 
P. R., Jules de Smet, was treated as 
a lunatic even by his own friends, 
there is now no political group of any 
importance which would dream of 
proposing to suppress or even to cur- 
tail the application of the proportion- 
al principle. And this is rather mer- 
itorious from our opposition parties, 
as they have been defeated in all the 
elections which have taken place since 
the reform." 

M. Georges Lorand, leader of the 
Radical party in the Belgian Cham- 
ber of Representatives: "I belong to 
the Radical wing of the Liberal Par- 
ty, but on this occasion I speak on be- 
half of all the political parties of my 
country. . . . We have used 
it [proportional representation] for 
thirteen years, and we have had six 
general elections with the new sys- 
tem, and the result is that not a sin- 
gle party nor a fraction of a party 
is opposed to the reform; its exten- 
sion is inscribed in the programme of 
all parties. The opposition parties. 
Liberal and Socialist, demand the ex- 
tension to the county councils and its 
more complete application instead of 
the partial one which is in force for 
the municipal elections. It is certain 
that the system of P. R. in Belgium 
will never be changed, save for the 
purpose of rendering it more com- 



Proportional Representation Review 



195 



plete, more just, and more propor- 
tional. It has been said by the op- 
ponents of the P. R. that it would 
lead to the splitting of parties, but 
it has had the opposite effect; parties, 
far from splitting into fragments, 
have brought their ranks closer to- 
gether, but within these ranks they 
have found room for such diversity 
of opinion as may exist, nay, as is 
essential within any living and active 
political force. The Liberal party, 
which has been profoundly divided 
into Moderates and Radicals, and 
which had been nearly excluded from 
Parliament, has united its groups and 
taken again a strong position in both 
the Houses. We have also seen last 
year the two opposition parties, the 
Liberals and the Socialists, united 
into a "bloc" in order to reduce to a 
minimum the votes which would have 
been lost in isolated struggles. 

"Another benefit of the P. R. for 
the country has been not only that all 
parties are represented in Parliament 
and in the great municipalities, but 
that they are represented by their 
ablest men and leaders, whilst under 
the former majority system, promi- 
nent men, such as Paul Janson, pass- 
ed half their lives outside the House 
in consequence of the hazards of the 
ballot. Parliamentary life has con- 
sequently greatly gained in author- 
ity." 

Dr. Horace Micheli, of the Journal 
de Geneve, Switzerland: "Nine of 
our 22 cantons to-day employ P. R. 
for the election of their cantonal 
council. It is about to be introduced, 
or is, at least, under discussion in 
three others including Zurich. Fur- 
ther, it is applied by several towns 
at their municipal elections. The 
most important towns in Switzerland, 
Zurich, Basel, Geneva, Berne, Neu- 
chatel and Fribourg, and many others 



of less importance employ it in the 
election of their town councils. Every- 
where, I can affirm, it has given en- 
tirely satisfactory results, and the 
number of persons who vote has been 
greatly increased. We have always 
found that P. R. increases the per- 
centage of electors who take part in 
an election. . . . All the cantons 
who [sic] possess P. R. for their 
cantonal elections, all the towns who 
practise it for their municipal elec- 
tions, have shown a large popular 
majority in favor of its extension to 
federal elections. This shows that 
those who practise electoral justice 
are completely satisfied with it, and 
those who are still against it are 
those who do not, or will not, know 
it." 

Sir John McCall, Agent-General for 
Tasmania: "In Tasmania P. R. has 
stood the test of many an election. 
We have demonstrated the ease with 
which the system can be worked. It 
has come to stay." 

Herr Daniel Persson I. Talberg, 
Deputy Speaker (Liberal), in the 
Second or Lower Chamber of the 
Riksdag (Parliament) of Sweden: 
"In all essentials the expectations 
entertained respecting proportional 
representation by its advocates have 
been fulfilled, while the apprehen- 
sions of its opponents have not been 
confirmed. The new mode of pro- 
cedure to be followed when register- 
ing their votes has not proved to be 
beyond the comprehension of the vo-^ 
ters, nor has it aroused suspicion in 
their minds; on the contrary, the vo- 
ters have learnt how to fall in with 
the new regulations with surprising 
ease and facility; it has not proved 
to put a premium on men of only 
average intelligence and ability, but 
has distinctly raised the intellectual 
level of the representatives returned. 



196 

... To sum up, the change from 
representation by majority vote [of 
single-member districts] to propor- 
tional representation marks, in my 
judgment, a great step forward in 
Swedish political life." 

Herr A. Lindman, late Prime Min- 
ister, leader of the Conservative par- 
ty in the Second Chamber of the Riks- 
dag of Sweden: "All the parties, of 
which there are at present three in 
this country, appear on the whole to 
like the new method on the ground of 
its yielding far more correct results 
than the old one based on the majority 
principle, especially where more than 
two parties compete at the elections." 

Herr Hjalmar Branting, leader of 
the Social Democratic Party in the 
Second Chamber of the Riksdag of 
Sweden: "Of the opponents of pro- 
portional representation at the time 
it was first proposed, there are 
scarcely any that have remained so, 
nearly all of them having by degrees 
become convinced both of the fairness 
and of the practical advantages of 
the new method. The thought of re- 
trurning to majority voting is certain- 
ly not now entertained in any quar- 
ter, so that one may take it for 
granted that future contributions to 
electoral reform will be concentrated 
upon improving the system now in 
force, to the end that it may serve to 
bring about as full a realization as 
is possible of the life-giving idea 
which is the basis of proportional 
representation, namely, justice to all 
alike." 



Defects of Our Representation 
Can it be demonstrated, by the 
facts and figures of some of our own 
elections, that the defects of our 
present system of representation are 
grave ? 

On November 2nd, 1913, sixteen 
councilmen were elected by wards 



Equity 

in the city of Columbus, Ohio. In the 
election of those councilmen the 
Democrats cast about 43 per cent, of 
the votes, the Republicans about 40 
per cent., the Socialists about 13 per 
cent., and others about 3 per cent. 
Now, it is easy to see that if the ad- 
herents of all these parties had hap- 
pened to be distributed quite evenly 
throughout the sixteen wards, the 
Democrats would have elected their 
man in every one. If, on the other 
hand, the distribution had been less 
favorable to the Democrats, they 
would have won fewer seats. If, for 
example, the Democrats had happen- 
ed to be packed solidly into as few 
wards as possible, they would have 
filled less than half of them and 
could not have elected more than 
eight of the ward councilmen. Fin- 
ally, if the distribution of the voters 
had been as unfavorable as possible 
to the Democrats, the latter might 
not have elected a single one of the 
sixteen councilmen. This is easily 
seen: if the Democrats had been dis- 
tributed evenly throughout the six- 
teen wards, and their opponents had 
not, they might have been defeated 
in twelve of the wards by the Re- 
publicans and in four of them by the 
Socialists. Whether, therefore, the Dem- 
ocratic ballots actually cast were to elect 
sixteen ward councilmen, or fifteen, or 
fourteen, or thirteen, or twelve, or eleven, 
or ten, or nine, or eight, or seven, or six, or 
five, or four, or three, or two, or one, or 
none depended on nobody' s opinion or will 
or vote, but only on blind chance — how the 
Democratic votes Happened to be distributed 
geographically throughout tlie city — unless 
it depended on something still worse, the 
deliberate injustice known as gerryman- 
dering. This example was taken for 
illustration by chance, the author 
needing an illustration for an address 
in Columbus the day after the elec- 
tion. 



Proportional Representation Review 



197 



In the Congressional election of 
November, 1912, the Democrats of 
Illinois cast only about 39 per cent, 
of the State's total vote for Congress- 
men,* but elected all but seven of the 
twenty-seven members allotted to the 
State. As the total Democratic vote 
of the State (for Congressmen) was 
461,185, the Democrats of Illinois 
elected one Congressman for every 
23,059 votes. The Republicans cast 
about 31 per cent, of the vote, their 
total being 364,940, but they elected 
only five of the twenty-seven Con- 
gressmen. It required 72,988 Repub- 
lican votes, therefore, to elect each 
of the Republican Congressmen. The 
Progressives cast about 21 per cent, 
of the vote, their total being 251,556, 
but they elected only two of the 
twenty-seven Congressmen. It there- 
fore required 125,778 Progressive 
votes to elect each of the Progressive 
Congressmen. The Socialists cast 
about IV2 per cent, of the vote, their 
total being 88,675, but they did not 
elect a single Congressman. 

If the list system of proportional 
representation set forth in this ar- 
ticle had been in use in Illinois in 
1912 for the election of members of 
the national House of Representa- 
tives, the Democrats would have 
elected eleven instead of twenty, the 
Republicans eight instead of five, the 
Progressives six instead of two, and 
the Socialists two instead of none. 

Consider the figures of the same 
election in another state, Michigan. 
Total vote for members of Congress, 
579,088. Democratic, 176,897 (30.5%). 



*The statements in regard to Illinois, 
Michigan, and Indiana are based on 
the election statistics in the World 
Almanac of 1914. Where any of the 
Congressmen are elected at large, the 
vote at large has been divided by the 
number of Congressional districts in 
the state in order that the vote at 
large shall have no more than its 
proper weight in the reckoning. 



Republican, 206,527 (35.6%). Pro- 
gressive, 175,868 (30.3%). Socialist, 
16,461 (2.8%). Seats obtained: by 
Democrats, 2; by Republicans, 9; by 
Progressives, 2; by Socialists, 0. In 
this case the Democrats won a seat 
for each 88,448 votes; the Repub- 
licans a seat for each 22,947 votes; 
the Progressives a seat for each 87,- 
934 votes; and the Socialists no seat 
for 16,461 votes. Here the Repub- 
licans got about four times the rep- 
resentation, in proportion to their 
numbers, that the Democrats or the 
Progressives got. Under the ''List 
System" of proportional representa- 
tion set forth later in this article, 
the Democrats of Michigan would 
have won four seats instead of two; 
the Republicans five instead of nine; 
and the Progressives four instead of 
two. 

In Indiana in the same election the 
Democrats got a seat in Congress for 
each 22,406 votes; the Republicans no 
seat at all for 166,698 votes; the Pro- 
gressives no seat for 127,041 votes; 
and the Socialists no seat for 38,457 
votes. To put it in another way, the 
Democrats of Indiana polled less than 
46 '.'t of the vote for Congressmen, 
but elected not only a majority of the 
State's Congressmen but all of them. 
To put it still differently, about 54% 
of the votes of Indiana got represent- 
ed in Congress by men whom they 
voted against and whose principles 
they were opposed to. Readers of 
this article who are not already con- 
vinced of the importance of a reform 
in our system of representation are 
requested to ask themselves whether 
a system that produces such results 
as those here analysed may not be 
at the root of our gravest political 
ills. Examples such as those ana- 
lysed above could be supplied with- 
out number. 



198 



Equity 



Great Britain and Ireland 
Has proportional representation 
any support in Great Britain and Ire- 
land? It is presented in the Parlia- 
ment of Ireland ("Home Rule") Act 
for the election of the Irish Senate 
(after the first five years, during 
which the Senate is to be appointed 
by the King) and for that of a part 
of the Irish House. The vote incor- 
porating the reform in the bill was 
unanimous in the British House of 
Lords and 311 to 81 in the Com- 
mons. Among the notable supporters 
of proportional representation in 
connection with the Irish Parliament 
were Viscount Bryce (James Bryce), 
Earl Loreburn (ex-Lord Chancellor), 
Earl Grey (ex-Governor General of 
Canada), and the Earl of Cromer 
(formerly ruler of Egypt). 

France 
How about France? There bills 
to apply proportional representation 
to parliamentary elections have been 
passed by the Chamber of Deputies 
twice, though not yet by the Senate. 
The present chamber has a large ma- 
jority for the reform. Among the 
notable proportionalists of France 
are President Poincare and ex-Prem- 
ier Briand. 

Application of P. R. 
Is the proportional method suitable 
for the election of administrative of- 
ficials? No, for there is no advan- 
tage in having such officials repre- 
sentative of the various interests and 



opinions of the community. Admin- 
istrative officials should not be elect- 
ed at the polls at all, but should be 
appointed by representative bodies to 
serve indefinitely so long as their 
service is satisfactory to those bodies. 
"It is practically correct to say that, 
excepting Canada and the auditors 
who are chosen by popular vote in 
English cities, no other nation in the 
world [besides the United States] 
elects anything but legislative repre- 
sentatives."* If, however, adminis- 
trative officials are to be elected at 
the polls at all, they should be elected 
by a majority voting system rather 
than by proportional representation. 

♦Quoted from Richard S. Childs, 
Secretary of the Short Ballot Organi- 
zation. 

P. R. Systems 
How is proportional representation 
carried out? The methods in use in 
the countries mentioned in this ar- 
ticle above conform pretty closely, 
except in the case of Japan, to two 
systems, which are explained in the 
U. S. Senate Document No. 359 (63rd 
Congress, 2nd session), entitled Ef- 
fective Voting, as the '"List System" 
and the "Hare System." For the 
Hare System the reader is referred 
to that document, a copy of which 
will be sent gratis to any one re- 
questing it of the Secretary of the 
American P. R. League, Haverford, 
Pa. Provisions for applying the List 
System to the election of members of 
the House of Representatives are as 
follows: 



A LIST SYSTEM OF PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION 

Nomination and election provisions 

Revised October, 1914 

.Sec. 1. Nomination of candidates for Representatives in Congress frov 
district* shall be by petition, signed by electors, who have signed no other petition to 

nominate any candidate for Representative at the same election, to the number of 

The petitions shall include the domicile addresses of the candidates, 
petition may nominate as many persons, not nominated bx anx other petitit 
there are seats to be filled from the district; but it max nominate .. 



Proportional Representation Review 



199 



petitioners wish. Each petition shall be signed, filed, and verified in the manner 
prescribed by law, shall contain the signed consent of each candidate, and shall be 
filed with the election authorities at least twenty days prior to the election. 

Sec. 2. The several lists of candidates — all the persons, whether one or more, nomi- 
nated by one group of petitioners being considered one list — shall appear on the ballots, 
without party names or emblems** in an order determined by lot by the election author- 
ities. The names and domicile addresses of the candidates on each list shall be printed 
on the ballot in the alphabetical order of the surnames. 

Sec. 3. The form of the ballot shall be substantially as shown below. 

[Form of ballot] 



FOR REPRESENTATIVES IN CONGRESS. 

Direction to Voters: 

Mark a crosrs (x) opposite the name of one candidate only for whom you 
want to vote. (If the candidate you vote for is found to be elected without 
your vote, or if he is found to have too few votes to be elected with it, your 
vote will be counted for some other candidate on the same list.) 

Do not mark more than one name. If yon spoil this ballot, tear it across 
once, return it to the election officer in charge of the ballots, and^get another 
from him. 

••• List 1. List 2. List 3. 






(Domicile Address) 

A 






(Domicile Address) 
C 






(Domicile Address) 
D 






B 




G 




L 




O 




H 




M 




P 




J 




N 




S 




K 




Q 




T 








U 




V 












Y 





















•States electing no more than seven Representatives should be polled as 
one district. States electing a larger number may be divided into two or more 
districts, the fewer the better so long as each district can be reasonably well 
covered by the candidates seeking election. 

••This provision in respect to party names or emblems has nothing to do 
with the proportional system. If it is preferred, party names or emblems may 
be permitted. Where they are permitted, the state will doubtless feel obliged 
to have an elaborate primary system, or something of the sort, to prevent the 
unfair use of party names on the ballot. Where they are not allowed on the 
ballot at all, such difficulties will be avoided. 

•••The squares for the voter's cross would be at the right of the names, of 
course, in States in which custom would require such a change. 



Sec. 4. The total number of valid ballots for Representative in Congress cast in the 
district shall be divided by the number of Representatives to be elected from the district, 
and the quotient shall be the "quota" or full constituency. 

Sec. 5. The total number of full constituencies contained in the total number of 
valid ballots cast in the district for the candidates of a list shall be the number of candi- 
dates on said list to be declared elected on the first assignment of seats. 

Sec. 6. After this first assignment of seats, the remaining seats, tf any, shaU be 
assigned to the lists showing the largest remainders of votes af f er he first assignment. 

Sec. 7. The candidates to be declared elected from any list shall be those individually 
receiving the largest number of votes. 

Sec. 8. A ballot marked for names on more than one list shall be set aside as 



200 



Equity 



invalid. A ballot marked for more than one name on one list, but not for names on 
more than one list, shall be counted as a vote for the list but shall not be counted in 
determining the standing on that list of particular candidates. 

Sec. 9. To any vacancy that shall occur, otherwise than by the operation of the recall, 

in the delegation of Representatives in Congress from a district, the [here 

name the proper election authorities] shall appoint, to fill out the unexpired term, 
that candidate from the list on which the vacating Representative was nominated who, 
of all the unelected candidates on that list, received most votes. [Here add provisions 
for filling the vacancy in case the provision in this section fails.] 



P. R. and the Constitution 
Is an amendment to the Constitu- 
tion of the United States necessary 
before a proportional system can be 
adopted for the election of members 
of the national House of Representa- 
tives? Not at all: any state may 
adopt the system, for the election of 
its own members of the national 
House, at any time. 

P. R. and City Councils 
Is true representation important in 
the case of State legislatures and 
even city councils? Why not? The 
national House, a State legislature, 
and a city council differ not in the 
nature but only in the scope of their 
work. 

C. G. Hoag 



South Africa 
The Governor- General of South 
Africa has signed the act of the 
Provincial Council of the Transvaal, 
explained on page 156 of the July 
P. R. Review, restoring proportional 
representation for the election of 
their councils of the cities to Johan- 
nesburg, Pretoria, and Roodeport- 
Maraisburg. Besides restoring the 
system to these three cities that 
had it before, the act extends it also 
to all other cities in the province. 



Ireland 

At the time of the writing of this 
article we have not been informed in 
regard to the precise form in which 
the Parliament of Ireland ("Home 
Rule") Act was passed. If, as is al- 
most certain, it passed in the form in 



which it remained for many months, 
it provides for the election by pro- 
portional representation of all mem- 
bers of the Irish House in districts 
electing three or more members 
(which means 31 members out of a 
total of 164) and also, after the first 
five years, for the election by pro- 
portional representation of the en- 
tire Irish Senate. 

In June was discussed in the House 
of Lords a proposed amendment by 
which Ireland would be so redistrict- 
ed for the election of its House of 
Commons that all the districts would 
return three or more members each, 
so that the entire House would be 
elected by the proportional system. 
Though it is improbable that this 
amendment was included in the bill 
as finally passed by the British House 
of Commons, it is well worth while to 
consider what happened to it in the 
Lords. It was there supported by 
such persons as Lord Loreburn, ex- 
Lord Chancellor, Lord St. Aldwyn, 
formerly Chief Secretary for Ireland, 
and Viscount Bryce, one of the most 
eminent students of democratic insti- 
tutions in the world. Though a divis- 
ion was called for, not a single peer 
voted "No." 



The House of Lords 

From the August Issue of Representation 

The proposals of the Government 
for the reform of the House of Lords 
were being awaited with great inter- 
est. It had been announced that they 
would be laid before the House of 



Proportional Representation Review 



201 



Commons in the form of resolutions, 
and the Prime Minister in reply to a 
question in the House on 29th July, 
1914, stated that it was hoped to sub- 
mit them "at a comparatively early 
date in August." But the outbreak of 
war has caused the postponement of 
the intended action to an uncertain 
date in the future. Meanwhile two 
of the foremost organs of Liberal 
opinion in the country have discussed 
the constitution of the Second Cham- 
ber and stated the kind of body they 
would be willing to support. The Man- 
chester Guardian in a series of articles 
during May on "The Problem of the 
Second Chamber" and the Nation in a 
series of articles during July, entitled 
"The Liberal Party and a Second 
Chamber," both agree on the follow- 
ing points, after an examination of 
numerous alternatives: 

1. The Second Chamber should 
be small in number, 100 to 120. 

2. It should be elected by the 
House of Commons on a system of 
proportional representation. 

3. In order to secure continuity, 
members of the Second Chamber 
should be elected for the term of 
two Parliaments, half retiring at 
the end of each Parliament and 
half, therefore, being elected when 
the new Parliament is called to- 
gether. 



New Zealand 

From the August Issue of Representation 

In the Governor's speech at the op- 
ening session of the New Zealand 
Parliament, 25th June, it was an- 
nounced that a bill making the Legis- 
lative Council elective would again be 
introduced and put through during the 
session. The Massey Government are 
pledged to the reform of the Legisla- 
tive Council, and have made two at- 
tempts to pass bills providing for the 



election of the council by adult suf- 
frage and proportional representa- 
tion. Both proposals were defeated 
through the opposition of the Coun- 
cil, but since last session the Govern- 
ment's position has been strengthen- 
ed by the expiration of the terms of a 
number of opposition councilors. In 
an interview at Wellington on the 
19th June, 1914, reported in the Mel- 
bourne Argus of the following day, 
Mr. H. D. Bell (Minister of Internal 
Affairs) stated that the Ministry "had 
absolutely decided that the Legisla- 
tive Council Reform Bill would go 
through this session and would pass 
into law." 



Australia 

The Liberal Party of Australia, 
which was in power before the gen- 
eral elections for both House and 
Senate that were being held about 
the time this article was written, has 
declared for the election of members 
of the Senate by proportional repre- 
sentation. If, therefore, the Liberals 
were returned to power in the gener- 
al elections, we may expect to see 
proportional representation adopted 
for the election of the Commonwealth 
Senate within a year or two. At 
present the Senate, which is com- 
posed of six members from each of 
the six states of the Commonwealth, 
is elected by the "block vote" (each 
voter voting for all who are to be 
elected in his state). Ordinarily, this 
means the election of the Senators in 
blocks of three, for ordinarily only 
half of the Senate, three from each 
state, are elected at a time. 

The application of the Hare system 
of proportional representation, which 
is already in use in one of the states 
of the Australian Commonwealth, 
Tasmania, to the election of the Com- 
monwealth Senators is naturally the 



202 



Equity 



first proposal of Australia propor- 
tionalists. As three is too small a 
number, however, for the thoroughly 
satisfactory working of such a pro- 
portional system as the Hare (or the 
List, for that matter), it is possible 
that serious consideration will be giv- 
en in Australia to the Proxy System 
advocated by Professor Nanson of 
Melbourne, which would work out 
justly even with only three elected 
in a district. 



France 

From the August Issue of Representation 

The supporters of proportional rep- 
resentation, who form a clear major- 
ity in the new French Chamber, lost 
no time in bringing electoral reform 
as a practical issue before Parlia- 
ment. On the first occasion of his 
meeting the Chamber of Deputies af- 
ter the formation of his ministry, M. 
Viviani, the French Premier, was 
challenged by the late M. Jaures, the 
Socialist leader, as to his views on 
electoral reform, and he expressed 
his willingness to meet at any mom- 
ent the Commission du Suffrage Uni- 
versel.* On the 2nd July a discussion 
on proportional representation was 
initiated by M. Charles Benoist, Pres- 
ident of the Parliamentary Commit- 
tee for P. R., on the following resolu- 
tion: — 

"That the Chamber, resolved on the 
realisation of electoral reform by 
proportional representation, relies on 
the Commission du Suffrage Universel 
to put it in a position to carry the 
necessary legislation with as little 
delay as possible." 

The first words of the motion, to 
the effect that the Chamber was "re- 
solved on the realisation of electoral 
reform," were carried by 544 votes 
to 16, but on the further parts a live- 
ly debate ensued. An amendment 
was proposed by an opponent of pro- 



portional representation that elector- 
al reform should be carried out "by 
means of the united vote of the Re- 
publican majorities of both Cham- 
bers." The intention of this amend- 
ment was obvious, as P. R. has many 
friends on the extreme Right, and it 
was strenuously opposed by a number 
of proportionalists of different par- 
ties. Ultimately however, in spite of 
an eloquent appeal by M. Jaures that 
electoral reform should not thus be 
made a party question, the amend- 
ment was carried by 293 votes to 254, 
and the words stating that electoral 
reform was to be accomplished by P. 
R. were carried by 323 votes to 245. 

The latter division is important as 
it emphasises the determination of 
the proportionalist majority in the 
Chamber no longer to accept half 
measures. Immediately on the con- 
clusion of the above debate a large 
number of supporters of P. R. 
brought in a new bill in the memor- 
andum of which the following pass- 
ages occur: — 

"We ask for proportional represen- 
tation and not representation of 
minorities. Every concession that we 
had brought ourselves to yield in our 
determination to make some pro- 
gress, straining the desire for concil- 
iation to its utmost limits, has pro- 
duced no result other than that of 
encouraging the obstinate resistance 
of our adversaries." 

The system embodied in the bill is 
the same as that used in Belgium. 
The constituencies are very large in 
size, their average population being 
about 900,000 inhabitants. Apart 



*The Commission du Suffrage Uni- 
versel is one of the standing- commit- 
tees of the French Chamber to which 
all legislation bearing on electoral 
matters is referred. Consequently it 
reports from time to time on any elec- 
toral reform bills submitted to it, and 
is responsible for the measures in the 
form in which they are presented to 
the Chamber. 



Proportional Representation Review 



203 



from the Colonies it is proposed to 
divide France into 43 constituencies, 
returning on an average 13 members 
each. Paris is divided into four con- 
stituencies returning respectively 14, 
12, 14 and 18 members. 

The bill has been referred in the 
usual course to the Commission du 
Suffrage Universel. 



Canadian Labor Elections 

From the Toronto Daily Star of August 22, 1914 

"The Toronto District Labor Coun- 
cil performed a gracious act in pre- 
senting to Mr. Robert Tyson a valu- 
able leather easy chair, in recogni- 
tion and appreciation of his services 
in electoral reform. For many years 
past Mr. Tyson has consistently and 
persistently advocated reform in the 
method of conducting elections, either 
on a small scale as in the election of 
officers of a local union or lodge, or 
on the wider national scale in general 
elections. Mr. Tyson's particular 
gospel has been the system known as 
the "Hare-Spence" method. 

"Ever in the van of progress, the 
old Trades and Labor Council of To- 
ronto many years ago adopted the 
"*Hare-Spence method of electing" 
covered both its officers and commit- 
tees. During all this time, now more 
than twenty years, Mr. Tyson has 
been present twice a year at the elec- 
tions of the Council, and has explain- 
ed the system and assisted in conduct- 
ing the elections. 

"That the system has worked satis- 
factory is evident from the fact that 
the Council has never given it up. 
And, to show its appreciation of the 
long services of the staunch advocate 
of the system, the Council made the 
suitable presentation already refer- 
red to." 



♦The same as what is called the 
Hare system, simply, in recent pub- 
lications of the American P. R. League. 



Note by Robert Tyson:— The "To- 
ronto District Labor Council" is the 
same organization as the former 
Trades and Labor Council, but with 
wider scope and a changed name. 
Years ago I co-operated with a com- 
mittee of the Council in framing a 
set of rules for the conduct of 
"meeting-room elections." These 
rules included both an alternative 
[preferential] vote for electing single 
officers and the proportional method 
for committees. The title "Hare- 
Spence System" covered both of 
these methods, because the method 
of marking and counting ballots had 
similar features, and it was conven- 
ient to have one title only. Two edi- 
tions of the Rules have been printed, 
the last being of a thousand copies. 
These are nearly all gone, and a third 
edition is in contemplation. 

The Proportional Representation 
part of the rules provides for the 
use of the Old Hare quota [the quo- 
tient resulting from dividing the total 
number of votes by the number of 
representatives being elected] with 
a "chance" distribution or transfer 
of surplus votes. A trial was made 
of the Droop quota [the quotient re- 
sulting from dividing the total num- 
ber of votes by the number of repre- 
sentatives to be elected, plus 1] in a 
few elections, but the other quota 
was found to be better adapted for 
use with a "chance" distribution of 
surplus votes. So the Council revert- 
ed to the use of the Hare quota. This 
quota has also the advantage of be- 
ing so obvious as to require little or 
no explanation. 

Two characteristic features of Dis- 
trict Labor Council elections are 
worthy of mention. These are the 
very few spoilt ballots and the large 
number of choices marked. Voters 
do not want their ballots to become 



204 



Equity 



null, and they know how to prevent 
it. 

It is the established practise to 
count the ballots of one proportional 
election in the presence of the assem- 
bled voters, with an explanation of 
each step in the process as the count- 
ing proceeds. One result of this is a 
wide diffusion of knowledge of the 
principles of P. R. amongst members 
of trades unions, because the dele- 
gates to the central body are of 
course constantly changing, and at 
every meeting new delegates are 
"obligated." Notwithstanding this, 
however, the personnel of the Council 
changes but slowly, and some labor 
leaders have been delegates for many 
years. 

Outside of the central labor council 
one of the finest supporters of the 
Hare-Spence plan is the Toronto 
Railway Employees' Union, about two 
thousand strong. They used the 
system in their latest election, which 
lasted two days, with regular ballot 
boxes at different points, thus en- 
abling every member to vote; the 
hours on duty with the cars being of 
course in such varying shifts as to 
make this necessary. The system of 
voting was so well understood by the 
election officials that they did not call 
in any outside assistance whatever in 
counting the ballots. 



Preferential Majority Voting 

Although the use of a preferential 
ballot for majority voting is quite a 
different thing from proportional 
representation, it is of interest to 
most proportionalists. It is not out 
of place, therefore, to record in this 
Review the fact that the system of 
preferential majority voting in use 
in Western Australia, has been 
adopted, for the first time in America, 



for the election of the city commis- 
sioners of Lethbridge, Canada. This 
is the system of voting that is called 
in British publications "the alterna- 
tive vote" and in the U. S. Senate 
Document on Effective Voting (Sen. 
Doc. 359, 63rd Congress, 2nd Session) 
"the Ware System." Under this sys- 
tem "the first count is only of first- 
choice votes. If no candidate has a 
majority, the lowest candidate is ex- 
cluded and his votes only are scrutin- 
ized again and added to the votes of 
the other candidates as the prefer- 
ences indicate. The candidates are 
thus successively excluded until only 
two are left, of whom the higher will 
have a majority vote [as between 
the two left], and be elected." The 
preferential system used in the prima- 
ry elections of Wisconsin and Minne- 
sota is this system in a truncated 
form devised to make the counting 
of the votes easier. 

We have recently learned, by the 
way, that it was a mistake ever to 
apply the name Ware to this system 
of voting. Hereafter, therefore, when 
we have occasion to refer to the sys- 
tem, we shall call it, to distinguish 
it from the Bucklin system* or the 
Nanson system,* the Western Aus- 
tralian system- 
It goes without saying that this 
system, though very good where ma- 
jority voting is called for, is not 
suitable for the election of a deliber- 
ative body. The reasons need not be 
repeated here, as they are mentioned 
at the beginning of the general ar- 
ticle on proportional representation in 
this issue. 



•Explained in the Senate Document 
on "Effective Voting," a copy of which 
will be sent gratis to anyone who ap- 
plies- for it to the General Secretary 
of the American P. R. League, Haver- 
ford, Pa. 



205 



THE SHORT BALLOT DEPARTMENT. 

Edited by H. S. Gilbertson, executive secretary of The National Short Ballot Organization, 
383 Fourth Avenue, New York City. 
Officers of the Short Ballot Organization: President, Woodrow Wilson. Vice-Presidents, 
Winston Churchill; Horace E. Deming; Ben B. Lindsey; William S. U'Ren; William Allen White; 
Clinton Rogers Woodruff; John Mitchell, Mt. Vernon, N. Y. Advisory Board, Lawrence F. Abbott, 
Richard S. Childs, Henry Jones Ford, Norman Hapgood, Woodrow Wilson. Secretary and Treas- 
urer, Richard S. Childs. Executive Secretary, H. S. Gilbertson. 



In New York the Short Ballot has 
made distinct progress again this 
year. It will be remembered that the 
constitutional amendment providing 
for the appointment by the governor 
of the various state officers who are 
now elective passed the Republican 
Assembly last winter by an over- 
whelming majority, but made little 
progress in the Senate. However, 
the effect of four years' publicity has 
shown itself very definitely in the 
attitude of the Democratic and Re- 
publican conventions this year. There 
was no question in their deliberations 
as to whether or not the Short Bal- 
lot would be advocated and incorpor- 
ated in their platform. It was sim- 
ply a question of detail. 

In the Republican convention ex- 
Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson, 
led the Short Ballot forces and ad- 
vocated what was regarded as a real- 
ly radical program, embodying not 
only what had been put forward by 
The Short Ballot Organization, but 
going so far as to ask that the gov- 
ernor be given a seat in the legisla- 
ture with power to introduce legisla- 
tion and the obligation to answer 
questions. 

This was too much for the Barnes 
wing of the party, they doubtless re- 
garding the Stimson proposal as 
"subversive of the very foundations 
of republican government." The fin- 
al outcome of the discussion was the 
following Short Ballot plank: 

"We recommend a substantial reduc- 
tion in the number of elective officials 
by the application of the principle of 
the Short Ballot to the executive af- 
fairs of the state." 

The Democrats had no such Pro- 



gressive leader as Mr. Stimson, but 
Mr. Wm. F. MacCombs and Mr. Wm. 
Church Osborne were sympathetic to 
the idea of the Short Ballot. Under 
the title of "executive reform" the 
party platform accepted the sub- 
stance of the Short Ballot principle, 
but unfortunately insisted upon the 
confirmation of the governor's ap- 
pointments by the Senate. Also, ex- 
ception was made to the appointment 
of the comptroller and the attorney 
general, the former, let it be re- 
marked parenthetically, being the 
more or less rich party prize because 
of the patronage which goes with the 
office. The Short Ballot Organization 
will oppose the Democratic interpre- 
tation of the Short Ballot principle 
to the last ditch. 

The Progressive Party of New 
York State, meeting at Syracuse, re- 
affirmed its platform of 1912, which 
contained this declaration: "We favor 
the Short Ballot principle and appro- 
priate constitutional amendments." 



Direct Primaries and the Short 
Ballot 

As the country is getting more ex- 
perience with direct primaries, it is 
beginning to realize that this reform, 
unaccompanied by more basic changes 
in the political system, is destined to 
prove a disappointment. So long as 
the party machines selected the mi- 
nor candidates with practically no in- 
terference from the ordinary citizen, 
the latter's own ignorance concerning 
them was concealed from him, but 
once he has had a chance to realize 
how many offices there are to be filled 



206 



Equity 



and what little preparation he has for 
making a selection, the more he is 
convinced that the great majority of 
these offices should not be balloted 
upon at all. One of the most signif- 
icant expressions of the relationship 
between the direct primaries and the 
Short Ballot reform is contained in 
an editorial in the Omaha Bee for 
August 22d, which says: 

''While the recent primary is still 
fresh in mind, The Bee urges the ab- 
solute necessity for immediate steps 
to shorten the ballot. Our biennial 
elections have given us two elections 
in one, so that the voter here in 
Omaha exercising his full right of suf- 
frage has just been compelled to make 
fifty-eight crossmarks down a strip 
of paper nearly five feet long. Two 
years hence, with presidential prefer- 
ences + o record, national convention 
delegates + o select, presidential elec- 
tors, United States senator and judges 
to nominate, thirty-three additional 
crossmarks will be required, calling 
upon the voter in the 1916 primary to 
record from eighty-five to ninety 
choices, the only variable being the 
number of constitutional amendments 
submitted. Clearly this is a load 
which will break down our machinery 
of popular elections unless quickly 
lightened." 

For the condition outlined in this 
article the editor has a constructive 
remedy. He would shorten the state 
ticket by taking off the ballot the 
secretary of state, auditor of public 
accounts, treasurer, superintendent 
of public instruction, attorney gen- 
eral, commissioner of public lands 
and buildings, and three commission- 
ers of state institutions, and vesting 
their appointment in the governor. 

The legislative ticket he would 
shorten by having the members of the 
Senate and Assembly chosen by single 
member districts instead of in groups 
by counties as at present. In the 
counties he would eliminate thirteen 
offices from the elective list, but even 



this would leave as elective officers, 
the sheriff, treasurer, prosecuting at- 
torney and members of the county 
board. 

Nowhere are long ballot conditions 
more acute and subversive of popular 
government than in Chicago. Writing 
in the Chicago Herald, Oscar E. Hew- 
itt says: 

"Chicago's best argument for the 
Short Ballot will be vividly presented 
to the voters at the primary, Septem- 
ber 9th. 

"Nearly two regiments of names will 
appear upon the ballots throughout 
Cook County. A total of 1,873 were 
found, but perhaps a score or so were 
overlooked. The exact number can- 
not be obtained conveniently until the 
specimen ballots are printed, which 
probably will take another week. 

"From this list of more than 400 
the voter is expected to designate his 
choice of candidates for fifty-one of- 
fices, all of which pay a salary except 
three. If he reads forty names a min- 
ute, which is more than many voters 
can do, he will get through in ten 
minutes. Unless some agency collects 
and distributes more information than 
has been made public, the poor voter 
will not know what to do with many 
of the names after he reads them. On 
the specimen ballots the addresses are 
given, but even the location of his 
residence is omitted from the official 
ballot. 

"There are so many candidates that 
even if a voter goes to all of the meet- 
ings within ten blocks of his home, it 
is improbable that he would even see 
all of the candidates of his particular 
party. At several meetings I have at- 
tended not over one-third of the can- 
didates have appeared, and Some of 
them were not so much as introduced 
to the audience. 

"The political managers have found 
it impossible to permit every one to 
speak, and have adopted the plan of 
having many of the minor candidates 
"stand up" so that the audience can 
get a glimpse of them for a second. 
Incidentally some candidates make a 
much more favorable impression by 
not speaking." 

In New York under the long ballot 



The Short Ballot Department 



207 



system, the party machines under 
Barnes and Murphy overwhelmingly 
controlled the situation in the Repub- 
lican and Democratic parties, at the 
first try-out of the new direct pri- 
mary law on September 28th. 



Progress under the City Manager 
Plan. 

The progress of commission gov- 
ernment of the older type in use in 
Galveston, Des Moines, etc., may now 
be said to have practically come to 
a standstill. Of course, there are 
many states in which this at present 
is the only form of simplified govern- 
ment easily available in the various 
towns, and for some time to come a 
few cities will adopt this form. Buf- 
falo has been fighting for commission 
government for several years and 
could not easily turn in the midst of 
a campaign to any other form, but 
wherever the citizens of a community 
are given "the right to frame their 
own charters, as is the case in the 
home-rule states, or are given an 
option between several forms of sim- 
plified government, the city manager 
plan has the place of undisputed 
leadership in popular favor. 

The latest addition to the list is 
Sandusky, Ohio, which has a popula- 
tion of 20,000. A most significant 
phase of the campaign there was the 
support, which proved decisive, of the 
Socialists. In every other commu- 
nity where the plan has been under 
consideration this party has been 
in opposition, doubtless largely be- 
cause the charters provided for a 
non-partisan system of municipal 
elections, which is opposed to the 
Socialist doctrine. In Jackson, Mich., 
a new charter will be voted on in 
November. This provides for a com- 
mission of five members and a city 
manager. Bakersfield, Cal., is consid- 
ering a similar plan, in which the 



members of the council, instead of 
being chosen at large, will be chosen 
from wards. Visalia, Cal., has re- 
cently elected a charter commission 
which it is understood will bring 
forth a plan embodying the city man- 
ager feature. The City Club of 
Berkeley is working for amendments 
to the city charter which will work 
out a similar result. In Oakland, 
Cal., the Tax Association of Alameda 
County is at work upon a county 
charter in which the general adminis- 
tration will be centered in a county 
manager who will have the power to 
appoint the other principal county 
officers and exercise other powers 
analogous to those of the city man- 
ager in Dayton, etc. This associa- 
tion has also been requested by the 
various improvement societies in 
Oakland, Cal., to draft a city charter 
providing for a transition from the 
regular commission plan to the new- 
er system. 

One of the most convincing pieces 
of evidence of the successful work- 
ings of the city manager plan is the 
first semi-annual report of City 
Manager Waite of Dayton. One hun- 
dred items are set forth briefly and 
convincingly in a pamphlet prepared 
by the Bureau of Municipal Research. 
From these items we select the fol- 
lowing as being typical of the re- 
sults achieved under the new regime: 

1. The completion of plans for the 
elimination of railroad crossings; 

2. Reduction of the current deficit 
of $125,000; 

3. Securing- of plans for a garbage 
disposal plant; 

4. The more prompt payment of 
contractors for public works; 

5. The building- of the Valley 
Street bridge for $12,000 less than 
appropriation; 

6. The development of more effi- 
cient methods of cleaning down-town 
streets; 

7. Reduced coal consumption in the 
water supply department; 



208 



Equity 



8. Cutting- the infant death rate 
for June, 1914, to one-half the rate 
for the same month in the three pre- 
ceding years; 

9. The building of a storm sewer 
for less than two-thirds the appro- 
priation therefor; and 

10. The discounting of all bills in 
the purchasing division at 2 per cent. 

Thus is the unification of powers 
under a city manager justified by re- 
sults! 

Another scene of activity is New 
York State, where numerous cities 
are taking advantage of the optional 
city government law passed at the 
last session of the legislature. Sig- 
nificantly, every city which is pro- 
ceeding under this law has passed 
up all of the other forms and is 
seeking the adoption of Plan "C," 
which provides for a small commis- 
sion with a city manager. In Niag- 
ara Falls and Lockport petitions for 
an election on this plan in November 
are already filed. In Mount Vernon 
the petition is not only filed, but 
signed by three times the number of 
petitioners required by law and, in 
all, by about one-fourth of the voters 
voting at the last municipal election 
in the city. A decided interest in the 
city manager plan is manifested in 
Auburn, where The Citizen, Thomas 
Mott Osborne's paper, is supporting 
this plan. Dunkirk and New Ro- 
chelle, N. Y., are going in for special 
charters. In the former such a char- 
ter has been drafted with provision 
for the Hare plan of proportional 
representation.* 

*A six-page leaflet, entitled "Com- 
mission Government with a City 
Manager,'' attractive in appearance 
and written in concise, colloquial 
style, has just been published by The 
Short Ballot Organization. It is fold- 
ed to fit an ordinary legal or official 
envelope and is suitable for general 
distribution in publicity campaigns. 
Price, $4.50 per thousand. 



Conference for Better County 
Government. 

County government in New York 
State, as we have before pointed out, 
is sadly in need of Short Ballot treat- 
ment. A clause in the constitution 
stands in the way of thoroughgoing 
reform in this direction, but the con- 
vention which meets next spring will 
have an opportunity to remove this 
difficulty. 

Perhaps the most serious phase of 
the county problem is to get the peo- 
ple throughout the state to realize 
that there is such a problem. In 
other words, the obscurity of the 
county government is an unrecog- 
nized but vital issue. 

In order that a few at least of the 
leaders of civic progress may be im- 
pressed with the necessity of county 
reorganization, a conference of lead- 
ers has been planned which will be 
held at Schenectady about the middle 
of November of this year. The exec- 
utive secretary is making every pos- 
sible effort to locate persons who 
are vitally interested in this subject, 
and if these lines reach any such per- 
son or persons, he would be glad to 
have them write in and give their ad- 
dresses. There are a few tax asso- 
ciations in the counties bordering 
upon New York City and these will 
doubtless all send representatives to 
the conference. Elsewhere in the 
state the county seems to be in a 
condition of absolute neglect. 

Numerous specialists in the branch 
of county government, some of them 
of national reputation, have ex- 
pressed themselves as willing to ap- 
pear and share their knowledge with 
the delegates to the conference. It 
is hoped that the meeting will event- 
uate in specific proposals for the 
guidance of constitutional convention. 



■* — » »■ 



Equity 

[Formerly Equity Series] 

Devoted to Improved Methods of Self -Government, as the Initiative, 
Referendum, Recall, Proportional Representation, Direct Primaries, the 
Preferential Ballot, the Short Ballot, etc., and the simplification and 
increased efficiency of Government in Municipalities, States and Nation- 

is cenX Ser c^dv Quarterly Philadelphia, January, 1915 






Contents 

EDITORIAL: Page 

After the War, What? 3 

The Essentials of a State Constitution 6 

President Butler's Idea of a Constitution for New York State 14 

Output of the Legislatures 16 

THE INITIATIVE, REFERENDUM AND RECALL DEPARTMENT: 

Editorial Fouls and Flies 17 

Referenda too Numerous ? 20 

Voters Down "Full Crew" Law 22 

Conservative Results from I. and R 23 

When Legislation is not "Special" 24 

New I. and R. Plans of 1914 25 

Efficient Government the Goal 29 

"Going It Blind" 30 

TafCs "Mission" and Some Facts 31 

Book Reviews: "A Study of City Charter Making;" "A Stand-Pat Charter 

Guide;" "War and Insurance" 33-37 

THE MARCH OF POPULAR GOVERNMENT— Being a Quarterly Record of the 
Progress of Direct Legislation in the Various States 37 

Arizona 37 Michigan 48 Ohio 53 

Arkansas 38 Minnesota 48 Oklahoma 53 

California 39 Mississippi 59 Oregon 54 

Colorado 43 Missouri 49 South Dakota 57 

Georgia 44 Montana 51 South Carolina.... 58 

f Indiana. .. . .Y.<jP\. . 45 Nebraska 52 Texas 59 
Kansas-*^ \</*t- 46 North Dakota 52 Washington 59 
I Louisiana 46 North Carolina 53 Wisconsin 60 
Massachusetts 47 Nevada 53 Wyoming 61 
Mr. Taft Again 61 
Distinction Between Legislative and Administrative Matters 62 

Definitions 80 

PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION DEPARTMENT: 

C. G. Hoag, Editor 

P. R. for Cities 63 

An Open Letter to the N. Y. Constitutional Convention and the Members 

of State Legislatures 65 

Proportional Representation in N. Y. State, by John E. Eastmond 68 

Proportional Representation, by William Dudley Foulke, L.L. D 70 

THE SHORT BALLOT DEPARTMENT: 

H. S. Gilbertson, Editor 

Bright Prospects in N. Y 76 

Better County Government 78 

Extremes Meet 78 

Growth of City Manager Plan 79 



Equity 

[Formerly Equity Series] 

Including the Direct Legislation Record, the Referendum News and the 

Proportional Representation Review 

The purpose of this publication is to improve the machinery tor self-government, to p» o- 
mote honest and efficient government, and to place public affairs and public officials 
under direct final control of the electorate. The ideal is: That every American commun- 
ity — town, city and county — shall have the freest and simplest plan of self-government 
possible, resulting in the most efficient government possible: That every state shall have 
a short and simple constitution, fewer and better laws, and a more efficient government: 
That the National constitution shall be more easy to amend than at present, and that it 
shall be possible for the people of the Nation to express themselves definitely concerning 
National issues whenever they may wish to do so. 

Charles Fremont Taylor, Editor and Publisher 
Edwin S. Potter, Associate Editor 

1520 Chestnut St., Philadelphia, Pa. 



editorial counsellors 

J. W. Sullivan, New York City George E. Chamberlain 

Founder of the Direct Legislation Record U. S. Senator from Oregoa 

Eltweed Pomeroy, Donna, Texas J. H. Ralston, Washington, D. C. 

Former Editor of the Direct Legislation Record Delos F Wilcox New York 

Geo. H. Shibley, Washington, D. C. T „ ~ ' „ 

Founder of the Referendum News L. F. C. Garvin 

W. S. U'Ren. Oregon, „ < Ex-Governor of Rhode Island 

Father of the "Oregon System" George Norris „ e o xt 

Senator Rob't. L. Owen _, U. S. Senator from Nebraska 

President of the National Popular Govern- MlLES Poindexter 

ment League ^. S. Senator from Washington 

Dr. Wm. Preston Hill, St. Louis, Mo. Morris Sheppard 

Father of the Initiative and Referendum in _ ^ „_ _ m tvt u - s - Senator from Texas 

Missouri Prof. Chas. Zueblin 
Robert M. La Follette Publicist and Lecturer 

U.S. Senator from Wisconsin M. Clyde Kelley 
Judge Ben B. Lindsey, Denver, Colo. Member of Congress from Pennsylvania 

Dr. John Randolph Haynes William Allen White 

Los Angeles, Cal. ...„,.- . Editor- Emporia, Kan., Gazette 

Father of the Recall in California Frances Kellor 
Dr. Wm. Draper Lewis, Philadelphia, Pa. „,. , , - - T .. , c • 

Samuel Gompers Chief of Progressive National Service 

President of American Federation of Labor Carl Vrooman, Bloomington, 111. 

Moses E. Clapp Lieut. C. P. Shaw, Virginia 

v U * S ' Senator from Minnesota George H. Duncan, New Hampshire 

Woodbridge N. Ferris ^^^ q{ Michigan JaM es W. Bucklin, Grand Junction. Colo. 
George H. Hodges Father of Grand Junction System of Prefer- 

Ex-Governor of Kansas ential Voting. 



Entered at the Philadelphia Post Office as Second-class Matter 



Single copies, 15 cents; 50 cents per year; three years, $1. To facilitate the spread of the causes 
represented by this magazine, four yearly subscriptions will be sent to different addresses for $1; 
epecial rates for yearly subscriptions or single numbers for propaganda purposes supplied on applic- 
ation. 

STATEMENT 

of the ownership and management of Equity published quarterly at 1520 Chest- 
nut Street, Philadelphia, Pa., required by the Act of August 24, 1912. 

Editor, Managing Editor, Business Manager and Publisher, C. F. Taylor, 1520 

Chestnut Street. 
Owner, C. F. Taylor, 1520 Chestnut Street. 

No bondholders* or mortgagees. C. F. TAYLOR. 

Sworn to and subscribed before me this 24th day of September, 1914. 

MARY E. HAMER, Notary Public. 
My commission expires January 25, 1915. 



EDITORIAL 



VOL. XVII— No. 1 January, 1915 



After the War, What? 

Tribes, states, nations, federations 
of nations, world federation for civili- 
zation! These are the grand steps 
of civilization. How far have we 
gone? Not as far as we ought, in 
this supposedly progressive twentieth 
century after the birth of Christ- 
ianity. 

We have at least passed the tribal 
stage, and arrived at the stage of 
independent states. The distinction 
between states and nations is not 
always clear. Some states are inde- 
pendent nations; and some nations 
are composed of federated states. 
In most instances of the latter these 
states have been "independent," or 
"sovereign," and have yielded certain 
portions of their sovereignty to the 
federation. This is the only way in 
which a nation can be formed of sep- 
arate states. 

Europe now consists of single-state 
nations, and federated-state nations. 
Some of the single-state nations, as 
France and Holland, have colonies 
more or less scattered and extensive. 
Some of the federated-state nations, 
as Germany, have colonies. Great 
Britain (the United Kingdom) is dif- 
ficult to classify according to the 
above, unless the newly provided Irish 
government would place it in the 
federated class. At any rate, it is a 
great nation, with very extensive 
colonies. Our own nation, the United 
States of America, is a federation of 
states that were never entirely inde- 
pendent; tho some of them in early 
times craved a larger degree of inde- 
pendence than was consistent with 



their needs. It can be safely said 
that under our constitution, the "sov- 
ereignty" of individual states has been 
steadily diminishing, to the benefit 
of the states and the nation. 

With these examples of the benefit 
of national federations in mind, let 
us now ask what is the main source 
of friction and war between the 
nations of Europe. Germany's com- 
plaint is that she has been hemmed 
in. She wants a port on the Atlantic. 
Russia wants an outlet into the Medi- 
terranean and also on the Atlantic. 
The universal cry of the interior na- 
tions of Europe is for ports. Why 
should they not have ports? — or the 
use of ports, which is the same thing. 
The state of Colorado is a mountain 
state without the possibility of a port 
of any kind within its boundaries. And 
the state is not seeking a port any- 
where. The same is true of other 
states of ours. Why? Because the 
protection of our flag gives safety to 
the commerce of all our states any- 
where under the stars and stripes. 
All the states along the Mississippi 
have equal privileges to the com- 
merce bearing possibilities of that 
river, either up or down stream. It 
is a matter of indifference, politically, 
whether a cargo coming down the 
Hudson is unloaded in New York state 
or New Jersey; or it may go around 
into Long Island Sound and be unload- 
ed in a Connecticut port. Only the con- 
venience of the owner of the cargo 
is consulted. 

The noble Rhine has most of its 
picturesque course in Germany; then 
it enters Holland, thence to the sea. 
Why should not German commerce 
go on that river to its mouth as freely 
as New York commerce goes to New 
Jersey or to Connecticut? Why 
should not German products find an 
outlet at Rotterdam, Antwerp or 



Equity 



Boulogne, instead of going up to Bre- 
men or Hamburg? Because German 
buildings and shipping could not enjoy 
the protection of the German flag in 
a Dutch, Belgian, or French port. 
Tariff duties could easily be adjusted, 
if the Germans couldbemadetofeelas 
safe to build wharfs, storage build- 
ings, etc., in Rotterdam as in Ham- 
burg. 

Must these sources of international 
jealously and exclusiveness continue? 
Or is there a remedy within our reach, 
the value of which has been proved 
in the liberation of commerce between 
the weak states of various federat- 
ions? 

Experience points to the only real 
remedy— an international government. 
Under an international government, 
all the nations composing that gov- 
ernment would have the protection 
of its flag. Germany is fighting for 
better maritime facilities; for relief 
from the cramped, hemmed in feeling 
that she has so long complained of. An 
international government sufficiently 
strong to dominate Europe, and in- 
cluding Holland, Belgium and France, 
the countries to the west of Germany 
that have the maritime facilities that 
Germany covets, would give to Ger- 
many these advantages if Germany 
were in the federation, and Holland, 
Belgium and France would be bene- 
fitted as much as Germany. How 
much better would such a plan be 
than fighting for these things! And 
fighting does not attain the object. 
The same enlightened plan would open 
up the south eastern ports to Ger- 
many and Austria, and all concerned 
would be benefitted thereby. 

The same principle would give to 
Russia all she could use in the way 
of ports, wherever she could use them 
— and none would say nay. If Great 



Britain were a part of the interna- 
tional government, Britania would not 
need to rule the sea. Instead of pro- 
ducing dreadnoughts, England could 
enter to a greater extent than ever 
into the carrying trade. All the nations 
in the new government would find a 
new and larger freedom. So many 
benefits would flow therefrom that no 
European nation could afford to stay 
out. 

The first and main interest of a 
federation of states is peace. Of 
what value are the resources of any 
state, its fertile soil, rich mines, nav- 
igable rivers, safe harbors, etc., if 
it is to be periodically devas- 
tated by war? This question applies 
to strong nations as well as 
to weak states. However strong 
a nation may be, as long as 
there are other independent nations 
as strong, it is in danger. Hence it 
is necessary that strong nations as 
well as weak nations seek safety in 
federation. 

There have been alliances, as witness 
the Triple Alliance and the Triple 
Entente, which are now in death grap- 
ple (except that Italy is not now 
acting with the other members of 
what was the Triple Alliance). 
Such combinations only make matters 
worse. They are not sufficiently in- 
clusive to prevent war, and they make 
war much more terrible than it other- 
wise would be, by dragging nations 
into war because of their treaty 
obligations. Alliance against alliance 
is worse than nation against nation. 
Witness the present war, unequaled 
in the history of man. Hence we see 
that combination defeats its own 
object unless it is sufficiently inclu- 
sive to dominate. For example if 
there were a quadruple alliance, unit- 
ing Great Britain, France, Germany 



Editorial 



and Russia, it could effectually keep 
the peace of Europe, as long as the 
alliance were really close and sincere. 
But alliances are notoriously unstable. 

But how about such a European 
federation threatening the safety and 
interests of our own precious Ameri- 
can federation ? We have heard in the 
past of such combination being con- 
templated in Europe against America. 
The reply to such a fear is this: First, 
in the interest of humanity we must 
favor and promote to the extent of 
our ability a more enlightened plan 
of government every where; one that 
will prevent the recurrence of such 
world tragedies as the one now in 
progress in Europe. Second: we must 
be sufficiently enterprising to find a 
place for ourselves in such an inter- 
national government as that herein 
contemplated. Third, we have in our 
magnificent country sufficiently great 
and sufficiently varied resources to 
enable us to live indefinitely and in 
very great comfort without communi- 
cation with any other part of the 
world. Not that we would wish to 
do it; nor would there be any danger 
of having to do it, for the rest of the 
world would miss us as much as we 
would miss the rest of the world. 
On the other hand, there would be 
certain advantages in being thrown 
upon our own resources. As to safety, 
we could defend ourselves against 
Europe indefinitely, as defensive war- 
fare is much easier than offensive 
warfare. The 3000 miles of ocean be- 
tween us and Europe is a bulwark of 
safety. But why should Europe wish 
to attack us? 

No, we have nothing to fear. Nor 
have we as much to gain from an 
international government as the Eu- 
ropean nations have. But all would 
gain enough to richly compensate for 
the mental effort necessary to carry 



such a plan into successful operation. 
Indeed this is the next ^necessary step 
in the evolution of civilization. The 
nations cannot go on increasing arm- 
aments and training soldiers. Such 
a course is not rational, when a bet- 
ter plan of accomplishing the desired 
end, safety, is in easy reach. And 
safety guaranteed by an international 
government would be accompanied by 
many other advantages. In short, all 
the nations would not only achieve 
safety, but incidentally they would 
get all the economic advantages that 
they are now fighting for, the lack of 
which has disturbed their peace 
for so many years. 

As for the United States of Ameri- 
ca, we must not think of joining in 
the race for supremacy in armaments. 
If an international government is ever 
formed, our interests would be much 
better taken care of if we were in 
the combination than if we were out- 
side of it. 

An organic international govern- 
ment would be stable, and incidentally 
it would accomplish much more than 
national defense. 



TWO WRONG IDEAS SET RIGHT 

Some people have the idea that the 
Initiative and Referendum are conduc- 
ive to radical laws, to fads and fancies 
in government. 

Other people are now saying, since 
the November 3rd election, that the 
Initiative and Referendum are conserv- 
ative instruments. Witness the peo- 
ple's* veto of the full crew law in 
Missouri and the people's rejection of 
the universal eight hour measure and 
other reforms in California and Wash- 
ington. 

Both opinions are wrong. The Ini- 
tiative and Referendum are neither 
radical nor conservative in purpose. 
They are simply the means' of ascer- 
taining the will of a majority of ibe 
voters on a given question at a given 
time. 



Equity 



The Essentials of a State 
Constitution 



The object of a state constitution 
is to provide a process of self gov- 
ernment for a state. The constitution 
should be a "frame of government." 
The constitution should say what the 
organs of government shall be, and 
it should determine the functions of 
these organs. But it should not con- 
tain any matter that could better be 
produced by these organs. A definite 
line of differentiation should exist be- 
tween these organs and what might 
be or should be products of these 
organs. To illustrate, statutes should 
be products of the legislative organs 
of the government; therefore statu- 
tory matter should not enter into a 
state constitution. The constitution 
should provide the machinery of gov- 
ernment, and it should be confined 
strictly to machinery. Thus, the con- 
stitution should be cold and formal; 
it should be entirely neutral concern- 
ing all economic, political, sociologic 
and religious matters. 

A state constitution should be short, 
direct and simple. Then it will be 
easily understood and easily construed 
and followed. 

A preamble is not necessary; but as 
a graceful and noncommittal introduc- 
tion, a preamble is not objectionable. 
A review of all the state constitutions 
from earliest times reveals the fact 
that many early constitutions had no 
preamble; the present constitution of 
West Virginia, made in 1872, has 
none; and the constitution of Ver- 
mont, dating from 1793, has none. 
The New Hampshire constitution of 
1784 had no preamble, and the eight 
constitutional conventions since (the 
last one in 1912) have added none. 



The longest preamble is that of New 
York, 1777, if preamble it may be 
considered, which includes the Declar- 
ation of Independence. The next long- 
est is that of Virginia, 1870, consisting 
of about two pages. The shortest 
preamble is that of Michigan, 1850; 
"The people of the State of Michigan 
do ordain this constitution." That 
of Louisiana, 1845, is nearly as short: 
"We, the people of the State of Louis- 
iana, do ordain and establish this con- 
stitution." That of Pennsylvania, 
1790: "We, the people of the common- 
wealth of Pennsylvania, ordain and 
establish this constitution for its gov- 
ernment." The preamble to the con- 
stitution of Oregon (1853) is short and 
admirable: "We, the people of the 
State of Oregon, to the end that just- 
ice be established, order maintained, 
and liberty perpetuated, do ordain 
this constitution." In Equity for July, 
1910, page 85, the following model 
preamble is given: 

"We, the people of the state of 

do hereby ordain and 

establish the following Constitu- 
tion and form of Civil Government 

for the state of " 

After reading the above, are we not 
inclined to look with favor upon that 
of Pennsylvania of 1790 for brevity 
and sufficiency? But why should any 
preamble be necessary? It is simply 
a civil contract that the people make 
with themselves and with one another. 
Why should such a contract need a 
preamble? A preamble adds no 
strength to the instrument. After 
thus examining the subject, we con- 
clude that a preamble is not an essen- 
tial to a state constitution. 

Bills of Rights. 
It has long been the custom to fol- 
low the Preamble with a "Bill of 
Rights." The great variation in 



Editorial 



length and matter in the bills of rights 
in the constitutions of the different 
states indicates the doubtful value of 
this feature of a state constitution. 

Let us look at this feature of the 
constitutions of New York State from 
earliest times to the present. The first 
constitution of New York contains no 
bill of rights. In one place it is pro- 
vided that "no member of this State 
shall be disfranchised, or deprived of 
any of the rights or privileges secured 
to the subjects of this State by this 
constitution, unless by the law of the 
land, or the judgment of his peers." 
In another place trial by jury is con- 
tinued "in all cases in which it hath 
heretofore been used in the colony of 
New York;" and "acts of attainder" 
and "corruption of blood" are forbid- 
den. This is all in this instrument 
that even looks like the kind of matter 
contained in the usual lengthy "bill 
of rights." This constitution contin- 
ued till 1821, with only one amend- 
ment, in 1801, relating to the number 
of members of the assembly. In the 
44 years during which the govern- 
ment of New York State operated 
under this constitution, 6479 laws 
were placed on the statute books, and 
there is no record of any need of a 
"bill of rights" in the constitution. 

The constitution of 1821 contains 
no bill of rights. Article VII contains 
a section concerning disfranchisement, 
as above, and one on trial by jury, one 
concerning religious freedom, one con- 
cerning habeas corpus, a "due process 
of law" section, and one concerning 
liberty of speech and press. These 
are all the traces of the kind of mat- 
ter contained in bills of rights. None 
of the eight amendments refer to such 
matters. 

Constitution of 1846: In Article I, 
consisting of many sections, are re- 



peated the sections mentioned above, 
to which are added one forbidding 
excessive bail and unusual punishment, 
and one granting right to assemble 
and petition. This is all the "'rights" 
matter in the 1846 constitution, and 
there is none in the amendments. 

In the constitution of 1894, Article 
I from the previous constitution is 
repeated word for word and a few 
unimportant additions are made, not 
"rights" matter, and one new section 
is added regarding recovery for in- 
juries resulting in death. 

Here we see that our greatest state 
has gotten along during all its great 
and eventful history practically with- 
out a "bill of rights" in its constitu- 
tion. The constitution of Michigan, 
adopted in 1850 and continuing till 
1908, contained no declaration of rights 
except a few sections similar to the 
above mentioned, which occurred in 
different parts of the constitution. 
The early constitutions of many of 
the states had no formal declaration 
or bill of rights, but all except New 
York now blossom out with more or 
less extensive bills of rights, that of 
Maryland consisting of 45 sections. 

There is no record of justice having 
ever suffered in any state for want 
of a formal declaration of fundamental 
rights in its constitution. This fea- 
ture seems to be more a matter of 
fashion than for any real necessity. 
Fundamental rights were wrested 
from kings long ago and were safely 
lodged in the common law. And if 
there were any occasion to make them 
"constitutional" in this country, they 
need not go into the state constitu- 
tions, for they are secured to "citizens 
of the United States" by the U. S. 
constitution. Witness this portion of 
the 14th amendment to the U. S. 
constitution: "No state shall make 
or enforce any law which shall abridge 



8 



Equity 



the privileges and immunities of citi- 
zens of the United States." The citi- 
zens of every state are citizens of the 
United States. Therefore the citizens 
of every state are protected by the 
privileges and immunities guaranteed 
by the common law and by the U. S. 
constitution. Then why should state 
constitutions be burdened with useless 
duplications ? 

We may safely conclude that fun- 
damental rights have long ago been 
achieved, and that the U. S. consti- 
tution, our traditions, our institutions, 
our laws, our courts and the spirit of 
the American people amply secure us 
in the permanent possession of these 
rights. Then we conclude that a bill 
or declaration of rights is not an es- 
sential to a state constitution. 

The Real Essentials of a Constitution. 

We have seen that all proper rights 
are already amply secured. The peo- 
ple have full confidence in their ability 
for self government, and a constitu- 
tion is simply an instrument for ac- 
complishing this end. The people 
have the right and the power to estab- 
lish the kind of a government that 
they want. They want the simplest 
and most efficient government that 
can be devised, that will accomplish 
the ends desired. 

What is wanted, then, is the ma- 
chine, "the frame of government," the 
organic law — the kind of law that con- 
sists of organs — organs for making 
statutory law. 

Building the Machine. 

What is the basis for the machinery 
of state government — what is the 
chief and fundamental organ? Ob- 
viously the electorate — the voting citi- 
zenship — the voters. The first essen- 
tial in a constitution is to state the 
chief qualifications necessary for a 
voter. Universally, age is considered 



the first essential. In this country it 
is 21 years; in some countries it is 25. 
In most of our states and in most 
countries the franchise is confined to 
the male sex; and of course to citizens 
of the country or state and locality. 
Many other qualifications are very 
properly imposed, and they vary 
greatly in different states; as, edu- 
cational requirements; sanity; free- 
dom from crime; length of residence 
in state, county and precinct; etc. Our 
existing constitutions enter into these 
and other details in greater or less 
length, and no two states treat these 
details alike. Therefore we must con- 
clude that these details are not es- 
sential to a state constitution. In the 
present New York constitution, these 
details cover a page and a half of 
space. The limitations of the elector- 
ate there given are proper and desir- 
able, but the point is that such details 
should be determined by the legislative 
branch of the State government and 
not by the electorate, the fundamental 
organic instrument of state govern- 
ment. The details concerning the 
electorate may change occasionally, 
while the essential requirements, age 
and sex, are permanent. Changing 
factors should be determined from 
time to time by the legislative branch 
of the government; the permanent 
factors should be put into the consti- 
tution by the people. 

Let us then conclude that the first 
essential of a state constitution may 
be worded as follows: 

The Electorate 

Every male citizen of this state not 
less than 21 years of age shall be en- 
titled to vote. Other qualifications may 
be imposed by law. 

The word "male" would be omitted 
in those states which admit women 
to the electorate. If the coming New 
York constitutional convention should 



Editorial 



adopt this brief and simple statement 
as the foundation for its new constitu- 
tion and simply adopt in the "sche- 
dule" a provision that all in the pres- 
ent constitution not inconsistent with 
the new constitution shall continue as 
the law of the state until repealed by 
legislative action or until expiration 
by limitation, this simple act would 
preserve all the present (very desir- 
able) qualifications, of voters, and at 
the same time a desirable sharp de- 
markation would be made between 
constitutional essentials and legisla- 
tive details. 

It is customary to deal with suf- 
frage, officers and elections in the same 
Article; and there is much detail in 
the different constitutions concerning 
officers and elections. If we conclude 
that the above brief paragraph in 
italics is all that is necessary in a 
constitution concerning suffrage, we 
may conclude that details concerning 
who may hold office, and how, where 
and when elections shall be held, may 
be left to the wisdom of the legislative 
branch. We wish to recognize rep- 
resentative government as largely as 
possible in the constitution, hence we 
should authorize the legislature to de- 
termine details, confining the constitu- 
tion to the broadest possible principles. 

The Representative Body. 

It is universally conceded that the 
legislative officers should be elected 
by the voters, because they represent 
the voters; and that legislative officers 
should be residents of the state or 
district for which the legislative body 
makes laws. That is, the members of 
the legislative body of a state should 
be residents of the state, and the mem- 
bers of the legislative body of a city 
should be residents of the city; but 
not necessarily of any particular 
part or parts of the state or city. 

And it is rapidly becoming conceded 



that administrative officers should not 
be chosen by popular election, and that 
they need not have been residents of 
the state or city prior to their select- 
ion. This changing sentiment will 
soon lead to changes in many state 
constitutions, as it has led to changes 
in a number of city charters. The 
impending changes prove that the 
position to be changed from was not 
broadly fundamental. Therefore may 
we not conclude that details as to offi- 
cials other than legislative representa- 
tives are not constitutional essentials, 
and that such matters may be safely 
intrusted to the legislative body ? We 
shall deal with this further when we 
determine the powers of the legisla- 
tive or representative body. 

We have determined that the first 
constitutional essential of a state gov- 
ernment is the electorate. What is 
the chief governmental privilege or 
duty of the electorate? Since repre- 
sentative government has been so 
firmly established, and has proven so 
essential to the success of government 
on the broad and complicated scale 
now demanded, we easily see that 
the next step is the election- 
of a representative body by the 
electorate. Customarily this is call- 
ed a legislature, because its func- 
tions have been limited to legislative 
functions. But the idea is dawning 
that an elected representative should 
have more than legislative powers. 
The old idea of complete separation of 
government into three distinct bran- 
ches, legislative, executive and judi- 
cial, is seen to be unwise and falla- 
cious. Government abroad and in 
many cities of this country effectually 
disproves the old "distinct powers" 
idea that unfortunately came into our 
political thought in the early days, 
and has so long interfered with the 
efficiency of our government. 



10 



Equity 



So we will discard a "legislature," 
because we 'want a representative state 
governing body with more than legis- 
lative powers; therefore the name 
"legislature" would be a misnomer. It 
should be a truly and a completely 
representative body. Its powers 
should be broad and inclusive. It 
should be really, and to all intents and 
purposes, the government. As it comes 
directly from the people and is rep- 
resentative of the people, it should 
have all the powers of the people ex- 
cept as limited by them. These limi- 
tations will later be put into this in- 
strument. 

The Board of Governors. 

Then, these representatives would 
constitute a Board of Governors in- 
stead of a legislature, as their pow- 
ers and duties would not be limited to 
legislation. This body of represen- 
tatives, elected by the voters, called 
the Board of Governors, would take 
the place of the legislature, and would 
also be given important powers of 
appointment, and possibly also of ad- 
ministration. It would be a single 
body, and not divided into two houses. 
Its numbers would be small as com- 
pared with the existing legislatures. 
It has been suggested that the number 
be equal to the number of congress- 
ional districts in the state; not be- 
cause there is any connection or rela- 
tion between the congressional dis- 
tricts and state government, but be- 
cause this is a division of the state 
already made for other purposes, and 
which might be utilized by the state. 

Ideal representation is not achieved 
by majority elections in single mem- 
ber districts. Some plan to obtain 
proportional representation of all the 
parties of considerable numbers 
throughout the state is very desirable. 
As a beginning, a state as large and 
populous as New York could be divid- 



ed into three or four sections, propor- 
tional elections being held in each 
section for the number of representa- 
tives that each section is entitled to. 
Later, when the proportional plan is 
better understood, by practise, the 
entire state should be a single dis- 
trict, electing all the representatives 
on a general ticket on a proportional 
plan. 

The Board of Governors, being well 
selected and truly representative, be- 
ing an epitome of the electorate, should 
have all the powers of the electorate, 
which means all the powers of govern- 
ment. So away goes the old erroneous 
idea that the powers of government 
should be lodged in three separate and 
distinct but coordinate branches. The 
possible danger of putting practically 
unlimited power into the hands of a 
small body for a term of years should 
be balanced by provisions for the 
Initiative, Referendum and Recall, 
so that the voters could, upon occa- 
sion, control their representatives 
through the Recall, or the acts of 
their representatives thru the Refer- 
endum or the Initiative. 

Fewer and Better Laws. 
The Board of Governors would make 
the laws. State laws are now made 
by legislatures, consisting of a Sen- 
ate and House, each consisting of con- 
siderable numbers, elected from single- 
member districts, the members having 
no special fitness for the responsible 
duty of law making. Most of our 
state legislatures have one session 
every two years, and in some states 
that session is limited to 40, 60 or 90 
days. In this restricted time these 
necessarily incompetent law makers 
"grind out" a prodigious number of 
laws. The writer has before him a 
list of the number of laws and reso- 
lutions passed in each of our states in 
the years 1909, 1910, 1911, 1912 and 



Editorial 



11 



1913, made out by the N. Y. State Li- 
brary at Albany. The number for the 
five years foots up to the total of 62,- 
643! In no place in the world is there 
such a prodigious production of laws. 
But not so much can be said of their 
quality; however the quality is not bad 
considering their number and the cir- 
cumstances under which they were 
produced. 

Our ''Board of Governors" would be 
well selected and well paid men, re- 
quired to devote all their time to their 
official duties. They would be in con- 
stant service, and would have time 
and opportunity to thoroughly consider 
and digest proposed legislation before 
putting it into law. It is presumable 
that, by this plan, the laws would be 
not near so numerous but much bet- 
ter. 

Should the Chief Executive af a State Be 
Popularly Elected ? 

People like to elect their governors; 
and have not popularly elected gover- 
nors usually been good ones? But 
the Short Ballot is coming, and state 
treasurer and other state officers will 
be appointed instead of being elected. 
Selection on the ground of special fit- 
ness, regardless of former residence, 
will fill these non-political offices with 
experts that will serve the state with 
great efficiency in their special capa- 
cities. Who should appoint them? 
If a popularly elected governor should 
appoint them, the temptation to build 
up a personal or party machine by 
means of these appointments would 
be very strong. Besides, we have a 
popularly elected Board of Governors, 
and why should not they do the ap- 
pointing? Or, why should they not 
appoint a chief administrative officer 
(some would call him "state mana- 
ger"), and empower him to appoint 
the state officers, the "manager" being 
accountable to the Board? This plan 



is pursued successfully in some cities. 
Would it work well in states? 

If a state had no popularly elected 
"chief magistrate," who would per- 
form the ceremonial and ornamental 
duties of governor? These duties 
could fittingly fall upon the President 
of the Board, chosen by the Board 
from its membership, and called the 
euphonious title of President-Gover- 
nor. 

The Judiciary ? 
Popular election is not the best way 
to choose judges. Appointment by 
the Board of Governors or by the 
"state manager," preferably the form- 
er, would be better than popular 
election. And the term of judges 
should be made long, to justify good 
men going on the bench; and a long 
term, even an indeterminate term 
(with age limit), would be entirely 
safe if accompanied by a satisfactory 
Recall provision. No good judge need 
fear the Recall, for people will not 
sign a petition for the Recall of a 
judge without excellent reason; and 
when such reason exists, there cer- 
tainly should be some way to decide 
if the reason is sufficient to termi- 
nate his tenure. 

Subordinate State Boards and 
Commissions. 
These have grown to be quite num- 
erous in the complicated state govern- 
ments of the present day. They 
should be continued, under authority 
of the Board of Governors, until that 
body can supercede many or all of 
them by some simpler and more ef- 
fective way of performing their func- 
tions. 
County and Municipal Government. 

No state constitutional convention 
would now fail to permit local auto- 
nomy in county and municipal govern- 
ment, limited only by state general 



12 Equity 

laws and necessary regard for the 

state's own autonomy. 

* * * * * 

Now have we not covered all the 
essentials of state government? Then 
how shall we put it into words to make 
the essentials of a state constitution? 

First, no preamble. 

Second, no bill of rights. 

Third, the brief paragraph on page 
8 providing for the electorate. 

Fourth: 

The Board of Governors. 

All the powers of Government shall re- 
side in a Board of Governors, consisting 
of a number equal to the congressional 
districts in this state. The first Board 
shall be elected in the same manner that 
members of Congress are now elected from 
this state, but within five years from the 
first election, the Board shall provide 
some plan of electing the Board by pro- 
portional representation, by which plan 
{which, however, may be improved in later 
years) subsequent Boards shall be elected. 

Each Board of Governors shall be elected 
for a term of five years. 

The Recall 
Upon petition of a number of voters 
equal to twenty per cent of the voters of 
the state or of any district, voting at the last 
preceding election, a Recall election shall 
be held against the entire Board or the 
member or members of any district, with- 
in thirty days after the sufficiency of 
said petitions shall have been decided 
by the Secretary of State. No Recall 
election shall be held until the member or 
members sought to be recalled has or have 
been in office six months. Provision 
for formal complaint and reply there-to 
on the ballot, for succession in said office, 
and other details shall be provided by law. 
But until such provisions are made, this 
section shall be self enacting, under gen- 
eral rules of procedure. 

The Initiative 
Upon petition of fifty thousand voters 
of this state, any proposed law or resolution 



or a proposed repeal of any existing law 
shall be formally and publicly considered 
and voted on by the Board of Governors. 
A committee of five proponents among 
the earliest signers to the petition may be 
printed on the petition papers, and this 
committee shall have authority to accept 
for the petitioners any amendment to or 
modification of the initiative measure. If 
the measure be not enacted by the Board 
in its original form or in some modified 
or amended form satisfactory to the pro- 
ponents within thirty days from its first 
submission to the Board, then it shall be 
submitted to a direct vote of the voters 
at a special election for this purpose within 
one year from the first submission to the 
Board, if a regular or special election be 
not held within that time, in which event 
the measure shall be voted on at such 
election. 

The Referendum 

No bill or resolution, except emergency 
measures, shall go into operation until 
thirty days after the formal promul- 
gation by the Board of Governors. An 
emergency measure shall be one necessary 
for the health, peace or safety of the 
state, and said emergency and the reasons 
therefor shall be stated in one section of the 
measure', it shall pass by a two-thirds vote 
of the Board, and its emergency must be 
formally attested to in writing by the 
President-Governor. 

Upon petition within said thirty days, of 
forty thousand voters of the state, any bill 
or resolution or any part there- of, or any 
appropriation in excess of the preceding 
appropriation for the same purpose, not 
being an emergency measure, shall not go 
into effect until approved by direct vote of 
the electorate as here-in-after provided. A 
Referendum petition upon an emergency 
measure shall not suspend its action. 
In either case the petitioned measure 
shall be submitted to a direct vote of the 
electorate at the next general election, 
and if a majority of the votes there-on 
are negative, if an emergency measure 
it shall be repealed, and if not an emer- 



Editorial 



13 



gency measure it shall be null and void; 
but not otherwise. 

Publicity concerning initiated and 
referred measures, including arguments pro 
and con when desired, shall be provided 
by law, by means of a publicity pamphlet 
which shall be mailed to every voter three 
months before the election at which the 
measures are to be voted on. The sufficiency 
of Initiative and Referendum petitions 
shall be determined by the Secretary of 
State or other officer as determined by the 
Board of Governors. 

Further details concerning the Initi- 
ative and Referendum shall be provided 
by law, but until such provisions are 
made, the above sections concerning the 
Initiative and Referendum shall be self en- 
acting, under general rules of procedure. 
Here we have provided the govern- 
ing body and its control. These are 
the vital organs of the state govern- 
ment. Now for their powers. The 
people of a state have all the powers 
of government, limited only by the 
United States constitution. We have 
provided a representative governing 
body, coming directly from the people. 
The powers of this body should be 
limited only by the people thmselves. 
For this reason the Initiative, Refer- 
endum and Recall provisions immedi- 
ately follow the provisions for the 
body itself, and this is the only limita- 
tion needed on the powers of the Board 
of Governors. That is, the Board should 
have all the powers of government, 
subject only to control by the voters 
by means of the Initiative, Referen- 
dum and Recall. And we hope and 
expect that these great powers of 
government will be used so judiciously 
that control by the voters will seldom 
or almost never need to be exerted. 
However, these powers of control 
must be recognized in this formal way 
as the basic right of a free and self- 
governing people. 

The constitution should direct in a 



general way how these powers should 
be exerted, but' sufficient freedom should 
be left to Board of Governors to enable 
them to give the state the best pos- 
sible government, changing the plan 
occasionally if necessary. 

We have all the powers of govern- 
ment ready for operation, in the Board 
of Governors, with control valves to 
be used by the voters when needed, 
or if needed. We could safely leave 
the further mechanism of the govern- 
ment to this Board; but some perhaps 
would not be satisfied without designat- 
ing, at least in a general way, the 
duties of the Board. Let us try it, 
realizing all the time that future ex- 
perience will determine how best to 
do these things. 

The Board of Governors shall appoint 
such administrative and judicial officers, 
commissions and subordinate boards, as it 
may deem necessary to operate the most 
efficiently and ecomonically the Govern- 
ment of the state. And the Board shall 
establish such laws, rules and regulations 
as may be necessary for efficient and econ- 
omical government of the State. 

Each member of the Board of Governors 
shall receive a salary of seven thousand 
dollars per annum,and members shall de- 
vote their entire time to the duties of their 
office. The salaries of the appointed of- 
ficers shall be determind by the Board of 
Governors. 

Counties, municipalities and any other 
political subdivisions of the state are hereby 
granted as complete autonomy in self gov- 
ernment as may be consistent with the gen- 
eral laws of the state. The Board of 
Governors shall construe this paragraph 
in a liberal manner to local governing 
political units. 

This constitution shall not be changed 
or amended except by a constitutional 
convention; which shall be called only by 
popular vote, the proposition being sub- 
mitted by a three-fourths vote of the Board 
of Governors or upon demand of one hun- 



14 



Equity 



dred thousand voters on Initiative peti- 
tions. 

Does not the above cover all the 
essentials for efficient state govern- 
ment? Do not the portions above 
printed in italics constitute a brief 
and simple, yet complete, state con- 
stitution? It is a "popular" govern- 
ment, as it provides for popular elec- 
tion of the representative govern- 
ment, and it also provides for possible 
popular control of the representatives 
or their acts. And it provides for the 
selection of experts and payment for 
expert service without limit. 

The above constitution, being so 
basic, it's amendment would be a ser- 
ious matter — very different from add- 
ing the kind of matter that we have 
been accustomed to put into our con- 
stitutional amendments. To change 
the above constitution would be like 
changing the foundation of a building; 
and a constitutional convention should 
be required to do it. 



President Butler's Idea of a Constitu- 
tion for New York State. 
The prospect of one or more im- 
portant state constitutional conven- 
tions next year will bring out many 
expressions concerning what an "up- 
to-date" state constitution should be. 
The first important expression of this 
kind that has come to our notice is 
contained in a letter from Nicholas 
Murray Butler, president of Columbia 
University, to Hon. Henry L. Stim- 
son of New York. It is as follows: 
Mr. Henry L Stimson, 32 Liberty- 
Street: 

Dear Mr. Stimson: I have received 
and read with attention your letter of 
May 1 in regard to the forthcoming 
Constitutional Convention. It will give 
me the greatest possible pleasure to 
co-operate with any of my fellow- 
Republicans in formulating a pro- 
gramme to submit to the voters. The 



occasion seems to me of the highest 
importance and to call for the best 
efforts of every citizen. 

In general let me say that my views 
are that the Constitution should not 
have put into it any matters of de- 
tailed legislation that can possibly be 
kept out. We should avoid the un- 
fortunate and hampering policy that 
has been adopted in many Western 
States of putting the merest details 
of public administration into the Con- 
stitution. It goes without saying that 
this leads' to the breaking down of 
the fundamental distinction between 
constitutional principles and legisla- 
tive acts', and that it tempts to a 
constant tampering with the funda- 
mental law. 

I am in favor of: 

1. The short ballot. I understand 
this to mean that all of the State of- 
ficers now elected by the people, with 
the exception of the Governor and 
Lieutenant Governor, should be ap- 
pointed by the Governor, subject to 
confirmation by the Senate, for a 
term as long as 1 his own and made 
subject to removal by him for cause, 
publicly stated, and filed with the 
Senate. There is question in some 
minds as to whether the office of 
Controller should be so treated. Per- 
sonally I believe that it should. I 
am not raising under this head the 
question of an appointive judiciary, 
alhtough I believe in that policy sim- 
ply because it seems to me at the. 
present time to lie outside of the 
range of practical politics. 

2. Revised Legislative Procedure. 
— This I understand to mean that 
the Governor and heads of depart- 
ments appointed by him should have 
the right to sit in either House 
of the Legislature, and to take part in 
debate with the limitation that heads 
of departments shall participate only 
in debate on subjects germane to their 
several administrative jurisdictions. 
In such case it should be the duty of 
the Governor and the heads of de- 
ments to answer at stated times and 
upon due notice interpellations ad- 
dressed to them by members of the 
Legislature in regard to public busi- 
ness or policy. 

The Governor should have the right 
to initiate legislation in the sense that 
it should be within his power in sub- 



Editorial 



15 



mitting a message to the Legislature 
to accompany it with a formal legis- 
lative proposal, which should be dealt 
with by the Legislature precisely as 
if it were a bill introduced from its 
own membership. 

I do not believe that the Governor 
should have the right to refer to the 
people measures initiated by him 
which are rejected by the Legislature. 
There should be two restrictions upon 
the right to introduce bills into the 
Legislature. No bill should be intro- 
duced into the Senate unless three 
Senators, whose names should appear 
upon the bill, were willing to join in 
standing sponsors therefor, and no 
bill should be introduced into the As- 
sembly unless five Assemblymen, 
whose names should appear upon the 
bill, are willing to join in standing as 
sponsors therefor. This is in effect the 
system prevailing in the House of 
Commons as regards private bills. 

Moreover, no bill appropriating pub- 
lic money should be introduced into 
either Senate or Assembly except by 
the committee of the Senate or As- 
sembly charged with reporting money 
bills. The object of this provision is 
to lay the foundation for a genuine 
budget. The terms of Senators should 
be lengthened to four years, and those 
of Assemblymen to two years, and 
sessions of the Legislature should be 
biennial instead of annual as now. 
In case of emergency or exceptional 
need there should be special sessions 
of the Legislature called either by the 
Governor or on the request of two- 
thirds of the members of either House. 
The Legislature should have the right 
to pass a concurrent resolution re- 
questing a formal opinion from the 
Court of Appeals as to the constitu- 
tionality of any legislative proposal 
before enacting it into law. 

3. Lengthening the Governor's Term 
to Four Tears. — I do not approve of a 
referendum at the end of two years as 
to whether there should be a new 
Gubernatorial election or not, * * * 
6. Home Rule for Cities Stand- 
ing by itself this is a vague and 
uncertain phrase. For me it means the 
complete control by each municipality 
of those features of municipal business 
and housekeeping which do not in- 
volve directly the exercise of the sove- 
reign power of the State; or which are 
not under our American system dis- 



tinctly State functions. In drawing 
the line between these two classes of 
undertakings, I would give the benefit 
of the doubt to the municipality in 
order that its measure of local control 
might be as large as possible. An 
inspection of the bills introduced at 
Albany each winter dealing with New 
York City affairs or amending the 
charter, would indicate that the busi- 
ness of the Legislature would be cut 
down nearly two-thirds if a workable 
scheme of municipal home rule were 
provided by the new Constitution. 

Naturally, other matters suggest 
themselves, but I will for the moment 
confine myself to the important ones 
which I have outlined above. Faith- 
fully yours, 

Nicholas Murray Butler 

Mr. H. S. Gilbertson, secretary of 
the Short Ballot Organization, pro- 
tests against Mr. Butler's plan of 
the appointees of the governor requir- 
ing confirmation by the Senate. The 
reason for such objection is that re- 
sponsibility would thus be divided, 
whereas the sentiment of the Short 
Ballot Organization is in favor of 
concentration. 

Considering President Butler's 
communication as a whole, it is cer- 
tainly an important and notable one 
to come from such a conservative 
source. It contains a great many 
advanced ideas in regard to state 
government. We wonder if Presi- 
dent Butler's "Home Rule for Cities" 
would include the granting of the 
Initiative, Referendum and Recall as 
instruments of "Home Rule." 

As encouraging as President But- 
ler's letter is (it is almost "progress- 
ive"), yet he omits entirely the im- 
portant subject of popular control of 
public affairs thru the electorate by 
means of the Initiative and Referen- 
dum, and popular control of officers 
by means of the Recall. 

He also leaves the ancient bi- 
cameral system of state legislation 
undisturbed. Evidently, he would 



16 



Equity 



continue the unfortunate practice of 
electing men of no experience in legis- 
lation nor any training for that dif- 
ficult and important work, to state 
legislatures, to perform in brief ses- 
sions work of the greatest importance 
and difficulty, and involving great re- 
sponsibility. 

In addition to President Butler's 
excellent suggestions, we want a 
thorough revision of state govern- 
ment, particularly the processes of 
law making; and we want public 
control of public affairs, not by selfish 
interests in a quiet committee room 
with the doors locked, but by the 
electorate in the open. 



Output of the Legislatures 

All the way from 500 to 2,000 or 
3,000 laws, resolutions, etc., are pass- 
ed in every state during the average 
legislative session; and a great many 
more are introduced and considered 
but fail of passage. So we see that 
the measures placed before the voters 
by means of the popular Initiative and 
Referendum are comparatively very 
few indeed. It is fitting that this 
should be so, for the Initiative and 
Referendum are not intended to* sup- 
plant representative government, but 
only to restrain it when it is wrong 
and to supplement it when it is de- 
ficient. Tho the number of measures 
thus submitted be small, they may be 
important. Certainly the psycholog- 
ical influence upon legislators of the 
possibility of the Initiative or Refer- 
endum is important; restraining them 
from doing what the electorate does 
not want and stimulating them to 
passing laws that the electorate does 
want. 

At the recent meeting of the Nat- 
ional Bar Association the startling 
statement was made that our national 
and state legislatures had passed 
62,014 statutes during the five years 



from 1909 to 1913 inclusive. The cry- 
ing need is for fewer and better laws, 
whatever the process. 

Nor does the increasing of the dif- 
ficulty of invoking the Initiative or the 
Referendum appear to decrease the 
number of measures proposed or re- 
ferred. Curiously enough, in the city 
of Dallas, Tex., where the Recall 
petition requires 35% of the voters, 
there have been more Recall elections 
than in any other city, tho the Recall 
can be invoked in most other Recall 
cities by much smaller petitions, some 
as low as 10% or 15%. It seems in 
practise, that the difficulty of invok- 
ing the I. R. and R. does not deter- 
mine the frequency of their use. In 
many cities where they could be used 
the easiest, they have not been used 
at all; and vice versa. In a general 
way, the same is true of states. Hence 
the ease of invoking these powers has 
not proven to be a danger. 

The hope is that, along with the 
general adoption of the Initiative and 
Referendum as checks on the power 
delegated to the elected officials of the 
government, our form of both state 
and city government may be made 
more efficient by the concentration of 
responsibility and power in a small 
single-chambered body of specially 
equipped legislators, chosen so as to 
secure the proportional representation 
of all parties. Such a body of legis- 
lators,' or governors, or commissioners 
or whatever you choose to call them, 
subject to direct popular control, and 
in continuous service, would appoint 
administrative officials having special, 
expert qualifications, and would hold 
them accountable for results. Under 
such a plan, fewer laws would be en- 
acted; and such as were enacted would 
be so carefully considered that they 
would stand the test of use. No law 
should outlast its usefulness. 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 1 7 

The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department. 

Continuing the Direct Legislation Record, which was the first publication devoted to the Initiative 
and Referendum. It was started in New Jersey, in 1893, by J. W. Sullivan, as the organ for the 
National Direct Legislation League and various State Leagues. It was continued from 1894 to 
1904 by Mr. Eltweed Pomeroy, and revived and included in Equity Series in 1906. 

Also continuing the Referendum News, formerly published in Washington, D. C, by Mr. Geo. 
H. Shibley, and consolidated with Equity Series early in 1907. 



EDITORIAL FOULS AND FLIES. 



Catching Some of the Thoughts Hit 
Out by the Newspaper Editors, For 
Or Against the I. and R. 

By Edwin S. Potter. 

The sometimes brilliant editorial 
writer of the Boston Transcript came 
to the bat after the election with an 
editorial that has been widely copied 
by the reactionary papers, notwith- 
standing that it never once makes a 
hit. Apparently impressed by the 
fact that three measures submitted 
to the voters of Massachusetts by the 
legislature were approved at the Nov. 
3rd election, the Transcript man, per- 
haps from force of habit, repeats the 
old theoretical assertion that "the 
tendency is to give an affirmative 
vote," when a referendum on meas- 
ures is taken. 

Having handed down this hunk of 
pure wisdom, he then appears to have 
heard from Oregon where nearly all 
of a long list of measures were voted 
down. He takes this ditch airily with 
this sage observation: 

"This year the Oregon voters show- 
ed some weariness and possibly some 
resentment at having to make a blind 
guess at a solution of the numerous 
problems that were put up to them, 
and so they went to the other ex- 
treme." 

The truth about this matter of a 
voting tendency, as experience in the 
states having a fair system of the 
Initiative and Referendum abundant- 
ly has shown, is that there is no such 
tendency or rule when measures have 
been duly discussed and understood 



by the voters. If there is a tendency, 
it is to vote "no" when measures are 
not understood. But it is also prob- 
ably the truth that voters will 
experience waves of inclination, 
now progressive and then conserva- 
tive. This has been the experience 
of all peoples having the popular suf- 
frage as to candidates representing 
party policies. 

***** 

The Transcript then cites the com- 
ment of the Portland Oregonian to the 
effect that this attitude of negation 
was in the air and that it was directed 
"chiefly against those experimenters, 
professional propagandists and shal- 
low-minded busybodies, who though 
professing a profound admiration for 
the principle of direct legislation, have 
done most to bring it into disfavor in 
those localities which are watching 
the progress of events in Oregon for 
guidance." 

The Transcript says this is a confes- 
sion that "this innovation has not 
worked to the satisfaction of the peo- 
ple." Rather it might be inferred 
that the "no" voters found satisfac- 
tion in the opportunity to express 
their opinion of the propositions ad- 
vanced by the reformers and indeed, 
in the opinion of the conservative ele- 
ment the existence of the I. and R. 
serves the useful purpose of relieving 
the pressure of discontent and un- 
rest. But, on the other hand, those 
seriously seeking some change have 
the satisfaction of compelling their 
opponents to meet a given issue. All 
this tends toward a general increase 



18 



Equity 



in the intelligence of the electorate. 
Its educational value cannot be easily 
overestimated. 

The Negative Voting in Missouri 

The New York Evening Post also 
notes this year's negative voting on 
measures in several states and re- 
marks: 

But one likes the whole-hearted way 
In which Missouri attended to the 
fifteen that were placed before her on 
the third of the present month. She re- 
jected them all by majorities ranging 
from 40,000 to 292,000. Approval of 
this thumping vote is without refer- 
ence to the merits of the amendments 
and laws voted upon, one at least of 
which, the one giving women the suf- 
frage, we should prefer to have seen 
adopted. But Missouri's action shows 
her interest in dull things like amend- 
ments. About 450,000 voters took the 
trouble to say yes or no upon them. 
This is nearly 70 per cent, of those vot- 
ing for President in 1912. The State 
has really voiced its opinion upon these 
fifteen subjects. 

Elsewhere we have noticed in par- 
ticular the comment on the adverse 
vote on the full crew bill, one of the 
above amendments. But what con- 
cerns us here is Missouri's sweeping 
negative, which is only a repetition 
of what has taken place at every 
state election since the I. and R. 
amendment was adopted in 1908. The 
St. Louis Republic devotes an editor- 
ial to this tendency, pointing out that 
in the interval of six years 35 amend- 
ments, of which only five were pro- 
posed by Initiative petition, had been 
voted down at the polls. The Republic 
puts its finger on one cause of this 
negative voting when it says: 

The cause appears to be, not the 
power lodged with the people to initi- 
ate legislation but the growing habit 
on the part of the Legislature of load- 
ing down the ballot -with proposed 
amendments. When election day comes 
the voter is appalled at the changes 
in the organic law submitted for his 
consideration. His conservatism cuts 



the Gordian knot and he scratches 
them all. 

Why the Voters Said "No" 
But the Republic here does not touch 
another explanation of the "no" vot- 
ing habit which is as plain as the nose 
on your face to the Kansas City Star. 
On the day of election the Star print- 
ed a brief and clear summary of the 
15 propositions. This, in ordinary 
large type, occupied 8 inches of one 
newspaper column, with a paragraph 
for each subject. This condensation 
could be grasped in two minutes by 
any one able to read and a voter could 
know what he was voting on. 

"But the official ballot," said the 
Star, "would confuse a Philadelphia 
lawyer. It is likely to ball up any 
and every common sense voter. A 
maddening thing is that it is assumed 
by the law that all the mass of words 
and technical references to section 
numbers and so forth must be printed 
in order to inform the voter! 

"Popular direct legislation, popular 
control of the constitution, has never 
had a fair chance in Missouri. The 
power to amend the constitution, the 
power of the initiative and referen- 
dum, like every other princple that is 
good in itself requires a good machin- 
ery, a good medium of expression or 
of use." 

Thus a flood of light is let in upon 
the solemn and sedate editorial sanc- 
tums of papers like the Transcript and 
Evening Post, neither of which makes 
even a pretense of concealing its bias 
against any and all processes looking 
toward real popular government. 
***** 

Two I. and R. Ballots Compared 
The Kansas City Times of Nov. 12 
made an interesting comparison be- 
tween the California ballot and the 
Missouri ballot, as follows: 

The California ballot presented forty- 
eight questions to the voters. Too 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



19 



many? Granted. But the ballot pre- 
sented them clearly and well. 

Each numbered question was indi- 
cated first by a descriptive word or 
catch phrase. For examples, "Prohibi- 
tion^" "Local Taxation Exemption." 
Then came a brief epitome of what the 
proposition would do. 

A pamphlet distributed by the state 
to the voters some weeks before the 
election contained the full text of the 
measures to be voted on and a short 
argument for and against each one. 
The California ballot presenting the 
forty-eight questions was just about 
one-half the size of the Missouri ballot 
presenting fifteen questions. Suppose 
forty-eight propositions had been sub- 
mitted to Missouri voters, and all had 
been printed in full, and all the head- 
ings had been in technical, confused 
language! 

It is ridiculous to assume that the 
voter can and must read and study the 
questions in the booth and reach his 
decision there. As well say that all the 
candidates for all the offices should be 
ranged in the polling place to be in- 
troduced by name and character and 
record and purposes to each voter. 

The function of a proper ballot is 
simply to identify to the voter a meas- 
ure or a man concerning whom the 
voter has already made up his mind. 
The function of the improper Missouri 
ballot is simply to induce most voters 
to vote "no" on everything because of 
the doubt and mental confusion into 
which the ballot puts him. 

More light for all those editors who 
are still walking in darkness! 



But while we are considering the 
negative voting in Missouri let us 
draw the attention of the editorial 
pull-backs to a singular fact. By the 
overwhelming "no" of 324,000 votes 
against 159,000 ayes the electorate 
vetoed the full-crew law enacted by 
the legislature, an ultra radical prop- 
osition. Then by the still greater 
majority of 334,260 noes, to 138,039 
ayes the same electorate rejected the 
highly reactionary anti-single tax 
proposition to hamstring the I. and 
R. amendment. 



Does this look as if the voting in 
Missouri was lacking in purpose and 
discrimination? It is reasonable to 
assume that if the voters in that 
state were disgusted with the Initia- 
tive and Referendum they would hard- 
ly have voted down so effectively the 
proposal to undermine the whole sys- 
tem of direct legislation. 

Then, another fact should be kept 
in view, namely, that from 70 to 85 
percent, of all the voters on candidates 
took the trouble to vote one way or 
the other on the various propositions. 
What becomes of the charge of minor- 
ity government in the light of that 

fact? 

***** 

Finding Spots in the "Sun" 
"Twilight of the Political Quacks" 
is the facetious heading of the New 
York Sun's comment (Nov. 20), on 
the Wisconsin result, which is the 
theme of a great chorus of the unre- 
generate and reactionary press. The 
Sun concludes: 

In short, the state so long the forc- 
ing bed and experiment station of 
"direct" government and newfangled 
nostrums is distinctly "reactionary." 
So is Oregon, its only rival in the poli- 
tical patent medicine habit. 

This fling of the dear old Sun might 
have had more force if it were not 
based on a glaring error. Will some- 
one gently lead the Sun editor aside 
and whisper in his ear, what the 
whole world knows, namely, that 
Wisconsin has never adopted any of 
the processes of "direct" government; 
and that at this very election Wiscon- 
sin voters rejected propositions for 
the I. R. and R. by decisive majori- 
ties. That Wisconsin has been radi- 
cal may be admitted. But its radical- 
ism was achieved under the old and 
indirect forms of government. 

If the dear Sun, whose brag used 
to be in the time of Dana that it 
"shines for all," were half as ingen- 



20 



Equity 



ious in trying to improve our processes 
of government as it is in thinking up 
funny epithets to hurl at those devot- 
ing their lives to progress, the Sun 
might really contribute something to 
the welfare of the community. 

The Pittsburgh Dispatch expresses 
its serious doubt about "reforming 
politics by changes in machinery," but 
declares with a show of profound 
thought: "one thing will accomplish 
that result, and that is to increase the 
intelligence and morality of the vot- 
ers." 

Wonderful! But how does the Dis- 
patch expect the people are to become 
wise and intelligent? Ah, there's 
the rub. And there's where the Ini- 
tiative and Referendum score a home 
run. They require the kind of dis- 
cussion and action that really makes 
for more intelligent voters. 
***** 

The Correct Attitude 
Speaking of the big ballot made 
necessary in California this year, the 
Grand Rapids, Mich., Press thinks 
that "direct legislation on such a 
scale must defeat its own ends." But 
it reaches this discriminating con- 
clusion: 

"Having mastered the initiative and 
referendum we must now learn when 
not to use them, meanwhile keeping 
a tight grip upon them for emergency- 
purposes." 

That is the correct attitude of 
mind — not to discard a useful tool 
because it may have been used ex- 
cessively in the beginning. 



REFERENDA TOO NUMEROUS? 



Editor Equity: Tou will find enclosed 
a check for $1 and exchange, in full 
for my subscription to your Magazine 
for three years 1915, 1916^ and 1917, 
as per your enclosed bill. 

Tour magazine is invaluable to one 
who wishes to follow the progress of 
direct legislation and kindred reform 
movements. I should not want to be 
without it. 

Tours very truly, 
O. W. ROSS. 



This Question Forced into Prom- 
inence by Legislative Submissions 
More than by Popular Petition, as 
the Facts Here Presented Conclu- 
sively Prove. 

The Aberdeen, S. D,, News is one of 
a number of papers which have de- 
plored the increasing number of meas- 
ures submitted to the voters in states 
having the Initiative and Referendum. 
In its Nov. 23d issue the News said: 

The newspapers of the northwest 
are commenting quite voluminously 
upon the fact that of sixty referred or 
initiated laws submitted to the elec- 
torate on the first Tuesday of the pres- 
ent month, but two or three passed. 
The fact that the new laws, some of 
which were really important and 
praiseworthy, such as the irrigation 
law in South Dakota, for instance, 
were rejected by the voters has 
aroused much comment. Some of the 
newspapers are quite discouraged over 
the people as law-makers, while others 
blame the persons responsible for the 
submission of so many laws, some of 
them of but minor importance, to the 
people. 

To the News, it appears that the 
laws regulating the invocation of the 
initiative and referendum are to 
blame^ if any one is to blame. If it 
were more difficult to initiate or refer 
a law, agitators would be less liable 
to attempt to enact their pet theories 
into law by means of those provisions 
of the state constitution. As it is at 
present in South Dakota, it is a com- 
paratively easy matter for interested 
persons to secure sufficient signatures 
to initiate or refer a law. 

If the proportion of legal voters re- 
quired to bring about such action were 
increased, there would be fewer at- 
tempts to take the law-making privi- 
lege from the hands of the legislature, 
and only measures of sufficient impor- 
tance to interest a large proportion of 
the voters would be placed on the 
ballot — and the ballot would not be 
cluttered up at every biennial election 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 21 

with a multitude of laws the people Amendments by Both Processes 

have had neither time, inclination or The remainder of the fi rst mention- 

^t^lcolhtls snake right here. ed s f tes + . h f Ve * e V ^ 8 ' ™™f*' 

This is a sample of many efforts to tl0na [ initl f* ve > b y* h the voters 

., . ,, . „ - ., can, by petition, initiate constitution- 

give the impression that all of the , ■ , ± -n-*. ±* ,.■,*. 

u -J.* j • xi. t j al amendments. But the legislatures 

measures submitted in the I. and . .. , , .. , 

t> , . ,, i. - i also continue to submit amendments 

R. states were the result of popular . _ „. , ., 

.... , ., ., T , „ in these states. We here give the num- 

petitions and that the I. and R. re- „ , ... , , , 

,. . ,, ., , j. , ber of amendments submitted by each 

suit m a multitude of laws. . .. . , - ,,. , 

_, ., . . „ ~. ... , process m these states for this year's 

What are the facts ? The editor of ^ . 

Equity had occasion to get the facts l^ z ™' 5 by init iative 

from official sources to present in a , i «« initiative 

paper at the annual meeting of the r ansas "\ 2 " legislature 

New York Academy of Political California { » I ££*£. 

Science, Nov. 19 and 20, which will 5 «« initiative 

be published in its forthcoming "Pro- Colorado { 3 „ leg . islature 

ceedings." It is entitled "Recent Ex- Michi g an / 1 " initiative 

perience with the Initiative, Ref eren- " l J " le sisiature 

, . _ ,, „ ' He- • r 3 by initiative 

dum and Recall." Missouri .....{ g „ legislature 

First, the submission of constitu- Nebraska . . / 1 initi ative 

tional amendments is considered. The XT , "^ l " ] e ^\ sl ^ re 

..... . , Nevada 2 legislature 

list of states which this year voted Ohio 4 «« initiative 

on amendments was found to be as Oklahoma 4 " initiative 

follows, the number in parenthesis af- Oregon / n " initiative 

ter each state indicating the total of s> Dakota } jj " legislature 

amendments submitted in that state: This gives succinctly the recent 

Arizona (5) California (30) Colora- referenda of gtate constitutional 

do (8), Georgia (10), Kansas (2), Lou- . 

isiana (17), Michigan (4), Minnesota amendments, which may be summar- 

(11), Mississippi (9), Missouri (11), Ne- ized as follows: By simply adding 

braska (4), Nevada (2), North Dakota we find the following totals: 151 

(6), North Carolina (10), Ohio (4), Ok- amendments were submitted by the 

lahoma (4), Oregon (20), South Caro- n -, A «.„«„. „ j? i • i A « i 

Una (11), South Dakota (8), Texas (3), ol * P"* 688 ° f } e ^lative submission, 
Washington (1), Wisconsin (9), Wyom- and 43 were submitted by the voters' 
Ing (4), and Arkansas— September initiative; that is, by petitions. It is 
election— (3). evident that the old process of sub- 
However, by no means all of these mitting amendments is still active, 
submissions were in the so-called Ini- even in the states where the voters 
tiative and Referendum states. Of have the privilege of initiating con- 
the states mentioned above, the vot- stitutional amendments. Thus we al- 
ers' constitutional initiative does not so see that the voters' constitutional 
exist in the following: initiative has not been abused, as was 
Georgia, Kansas, Louisiana, Wash- feared b some anxious statesmen and 
ington, Minnesota, Mississippi, North , * 

Carolina, South Carolina, North Dako- edu cators lacking confidence in the 

ta, Texas, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. people. If abuse is here indicated, it 

Hence the amendments submitted is by the legislatures and not the 

in these states were necessarily in the voters. 

old-fashioned way; that is, by the Statutes, Initiated and Referred 

legislatures. Considering next the statutes which 



22 



Equity 



appeared on the ballots at the last 
election we find the following result, 
the number of measures, and process 
of submission being stated at the 
right of each state: 

r 9 by voters' initiative 
Arizona | 4 ,, u referendum 

Arkansas' ,2 by initiative 

fd " voters' initiative 

California^ 4 " " referendum 

(^5 " legislative legislature 

_ , - r -3 " voters' initiative 
Colorado i _ „ ,. . , 

\ 5 referendum 

Massachusetts ...3 " legislative 

referendum 

Missouri . 4 " voters' referendum 
ri " " initiative 

Nebraska-/ 1 alternative by legislative 
\l by voters' referendum 
r 8 " " initiative 

Oregon | ± „ legIslative re f e r. 

c 3 by voters' initiative 
S. Dakota { 1 « legislative reter. 

Wq .. , (7 by voters' initiative 
Washington i _ „ , . . .. . 

\7 legislative refer. 

To sum up the statutes, we have: 
Total 74. Statutes submitted by the 
voters' initiative 42. Statutes sub- 
mitted by the voters' referendum, 19. 
Statutes submitted by legislatures, 13. 
This does not show feverish activity 
in the line of direct action in a gen- 
eral election all over the country. 
There is certainly no abuse here of 
the recently obtained powers by which 
voters can demand direct action. 



Voters Down "Full Crew" Law 

Newspapers of the solid and con- 
servative class — such, for instance, as 
the New York Times and New York 
Evening Post, the Boston Transcript, 
Philadelphia Evening Bulletin and many 
others — were quick to notice one re- 
sult of a popular Referendum vote on 
Nov. 3 because it indicated clearly an 
advantage gained by the railroad in- 
terests. That was the repeal of the 
so-called "full crew" law which the 
legislature of Missouri had enacted 
and which had been signed by the 
governor in response to what was 



said to be the interest and safety of 
the railroad trainmen and of the 
public. 

This law was felt by the railroads 
to be an unreasonable hardship as it 
involved an expenditure of $500,000 a 
year for what they regarded as super- 
fluous labor. They decided to take 
advantage of the constitutional amend- 
ment permitting the reference of 
legislative acts to the voters. So 
they obtained the requisite 5% of 
signers to a petition in two-thirds of 
the congressional districts of the state 
and the measure was held up to be 
placed on the ballots at the next reg- 
ular election, with the result as stated 
above. 

The Philadelphia Evening Bulletin 
says: 

"Although the measure had been 
passed by the legislature and signed 
by the governor, the appeal of the 
railroads to the people resulted in a 
popular vote for fair play and the re- 
jection of the law. It was the first 
time that the railroad situation and 
the protest of the railroad corporations 
against over taxation, unjust rate re- 
straint, crippling legislation, which 
has forced them to curtail expendi- 
tures, cut down wage-rolls, reduce 
their patronage of allied industries, 
had been submitted to a popular vote." 

The New York Times says: 

"The result increases confidence in 
the people and weakens confidence in 
the politicians. The people are better 
judges of their business than those 
who assume to be specialists in what 
the people think and want. That is 
the politicians' business, and they fail- 
ed lamentably in Missouri, or they 
would never have invited the humiliat- 
ing exposure of them in this vote." 

The Boston Transcript says: 
"Missouri has done the railroads of 
that state, and we believe of the coun- 
try as well, a service by the reversal 
of the 'full crew' law at the polls^ a 
law that compelled these corporations 
to carry on every train and pay for 
him, a man who was not needed. The 
result was symptomatic or at least we 
so hope and believe." 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



23 



The North Adams, Mass., Tran- 
script, under the caption, "Another 
Referendum Vindication," says: 

"Perhaps no more striking vindica- 
tion of the Referendum, when properly 
and sensibly used, has ever been re- 
corded than the result of Missouri's 
popular vote on the 'full crew bill'. 
The question was put on the ballot; 
and to the astonishment of the politic- 
ians, the people of the state did for 
the railroads what the railroads could 
not do for themselves. They repealed 
the law by such a majority as no indiv- 
idual candidate was able to get." 

With the pros and cons of the law 
thus barred by popular vote we are 
not here concerned. But we are very 
much concerned with the fact, thus 
practically illustrated, that the Refer- 
endum is a perfectly neutral instru- 
ment always at the disposal of what- 
ever group of voters can win the 
favoring opinions of a majority. 

It may be true that reformers and 
radicals have been prominent in the 
advocacy of the I. and R. system 
because they could see in it the poss- 
ibility of obtaining a submission of 
the measures to which they were com- 
mitted. But that never meant that 
the process of direct voting had any 
bias, either radical or conservative. 
And some of our wisest statesmen 
have seen that the best way to be 
rid of a persistent set of reform 
advocates is to let them have their 
say and then vote them down, if you 
can. If a proposed reform can get a 
majority of the voters, then the plan 
is entitled to a trial. That seems to 
be the fair way, and in the long run 
the safer way to deal with the various 
social and political problems coming 
up for legislative action. 

The present instance in Missouri 
shows how ''the interests" may use 
this method of law making or law 
veto, and win out if they can com- 



mand a majority. The people are tired 
of voting in a pro forma way, now for 
one set of office seekers and now for 
another, running on platforms made 
of political buncombe. But who dares 
assert that the people are tired of 
having their say on definite, concrete 
questions which directly concern their 
welfare in one way or another? In 
the light of this experience the con- 
servative forces of society must see 
that it is to their own interest not to 
stand longer in the way of this funda- 
mental reform, the Initiative and 
Referendum, but rather to go out and 
meet it half way in the knowledge 
that they will have as good a chance 
to use it to impress their views on 
society as any one else. 



Conservative Results from I. and R, 

The Washington, D. C. Times of 
Nov. 19 contained a most interesting 
and illuminating editorial entitled 
"The Conservative Referendum," deal- 
ing with certain results of the Nov. 3 
election. 

Concerning the defeat of the full- 
crew law by referendum vote in Mis- 
souri, the Times points out that in 
other states where full-crew laws 
have been enacted they had no Refer- 
endum and so could not give the 
people a chance to reverse them. 
Continuing the Times says: 

One amusing consequence of this 
Missouri experience was that a large 
number of highly conservative news- 
papers, which have for many years 
been denouncing the initiative and 
referendum as the last extreme of 
radicalism, have suddenly "flopped." 
They have come to realize that the 
people are at bottom, and in mass, 
conservative, not radical. Sections of 
the people will be found radical on 
particular subjects; the labor people 
on labor subjects; the financial inter- 
ests on financial subjects; the railroad 
owners and managers on railroad and 
transportation topics; and so on. But 



24 

all the people will not be found dan- 
gerously radical on any subject. 

The Times finds further illustration 
from results in other I. and R. states 
and quotes the following summary 
from the California Outlook: 

The people are conservative. They 
may vote for radical candidates and 
they will, under leadership, approve of 
radical measures. But on direct ref- 
erence, without the support of organ- 
ized government, the people vote with 
cautious conservatism. And they re- 
fuse to pass class legislation of any 
sort. Witness the overwhelming de- 
feat of the universal eight-hour law in 
California and everywhere it was pre- 
sented. In Oregon, of twenty-eight 
propositions, only five carried. This 
is to be sure, nothing against direct 
legislation. Most bills introduced In 
state legislatures, or in Congress, are 
defeated, too. Arizona defeated an 
anti-blacklist law, and a law requiring 
80 per cent, of mine workers to be 
Americans. Both- were labor-class 
measures, defeated by the vote of all 
the people. This is not to say that the 
people may not have been mistaken, or 
overcautious, as to one or the other of 
these laws. The point is that if they 
made a mistake, they made it on the 
conservative side. The referendum is 
the weapon of conservatism. The ini- 
tiative is the appeal of radicalism, but 
the appeal is usually vain. And the 
best thing to do with a radical propo- 
sition is to give it a fair chance. It Is 
pretty sure to be defeated by the con- 
servatism of the people, and that sort 
of a defeat leaves even the radicals 
satisfied. For the radicals believe in 
government by the people, even when 
it decides against them. 

Thereupon the Times comes to the 
following very wise conclusion: 

"It would be difficult to state the 
whole case better than the California 
paper sets it down. There are sor- 
rows among some of the radicals in 
Western States, over the defeat of 
their pet measures; but they can't 
well protest very violently: they got 
the decision which they wanted: the 
decision of the people. 

"The people are not fools. They 
know pretty well what they want. 
All of them know what all of them 
want. They may not know what is 



Equity 

good for them at a given time; they 
may make mistakes. But when all 
the people make a mistake, it is 
surely their own affair. They will be 
willing enough to rectify the mis- 
take when assured of it. Meanwhile, 
the referendum continues to win rec- 
ognition as about the most conser- 
vative legislative process yet in- 
vented." 



When Legislation is not "Special" 

From the Lewistown, Mont., Demo- 
crat we cull this illuminating com- 
ment on the people's veto of the Mis- 
souri full-crew law: 

The contention of the friends of the 
initiative and referendum power of the 
people over legislative enactments, has 
always been that it was a safeguard 
against legislation forced by a minor- 
ity of the people through a legislative 
body. 

The friends of the initiative and ref- 
erendum have contended that the full 
vote of all the people, who can have 
no personal interest in any special leg- 
islation, would always overwhelm the 
minority interest that did have a spe- 
cial interest in the enactment of a 
given law. 

If a majority of all the voters were 
in favor of a given law, then it was no 
no longer special legislation but de- 
manded by a majority of all the peo- 
ple and the will of the majority 
should govern. 

The referendum vote in Missouri in 
the matter of the full crew law is 
worth the careful study of those who 
have been disposed, in good faith, to 
decry against "the rule of the mob." 

Initiative in our Legislatures 
It is quite common for unthinking 
or ill-informed opponents of the I. and 
R. to urge that the initiative is es- 
pecially open to abuse by permitting 
a small minority of voters to set in 
motion all sorts of crude undigested 
propositions for the voters to decide. 
Do these objectors consider the 
extent of the initiative in our existing 
state legislatures or city councils? 
In the Nov. 17 issue of the Boston 
Herald there aooeared a letter from 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



25 



Chas. G. Washburn of Worcester deal- 
ing with the length of the ordinary 
legislative sessions and the mass of 
the legislative output. In this letter 
Mr. Washburn says: 

I will hazard the opinion that the 
length of the sessions of our Legisla- 
ture will never be materially diminish- 
ed until our system is changed. As it 
now exists it permits the "initiative" 
to a degree which makes the Oregon 
initiative, for example, look like a 
reactionary measure. It is practically 
true that any individual in the com- 
monwealth can cause to be introduced 
in our Legislature a bill or resolution 
on any subject, which must be re- 
ferred to a committee, must be con- 
sidered by the committee, usually in a 
public hearing, and acted upon; must 
be reported by the committee to either 
the Senate or the House and finally 
disposed of before the Legislature can 
be prorogued. 

The truth about the popular Ini- 
tiative is that it is far from easy to 
make use of. In order to get a tenth 
or even a twentieth of all the voters 
in a state to sign a petition for a 
given proposition necessitates very 
great effort and expense, whatever 
the character of the measure or the 
motives of the proponents. 



NEW I. AND R. PLANS OF 1914. 



Revision, Not Amendment 

A new convert to the Initiative, Re- 
ferendum and Recall is likely to think 
that if he can hitch these powers to 
any old hulk of a state constitution, 
said constitution will thus be made 
perfect, and the people in said state 
will have an ideal government. While 
such "hitching" process greatly im- 
proves any state constitution, yet the 
above expectation of the enthusiastic 
new Convert will not be fully realized. 
All our state constitutions need re- 
vision in the direction of simplicity 
and efficiency in representative and ad- 
ministrative government. When that 
is done there will be rarely need for 
the Initiative, Referendum or Recall. 



Some of the Proposals of the Past 
Year for Improving the Process of 
Direct Control of Government. 

The great nation-wide movement to 
enable the people of the United States 
actually to exercise their boasted and 
undenied sovereignty over their gov- 
ernment through reserved powers now 
generally known as the Initiative, 
Referendum and Recall, goes forward 
with ever increasing power and speed 
as public opinion is aroused and en- 
lightened on the subject. It comes 
as a corrective for the existing repre- 
sentative government, not to destroy 
or supercede that necessary instru- 
ment of the political organism. Un- 
less the people obtain these powers, 
real popular government will continue 
to be crippled, and invisible powers 
of vast corporate fortunes will con- 
tinue to corrupt the supposed repre- 
sentatives of the people. 

But as the great campaign goes ore 
for the reserving of these powers by 
the people, it becomes the duty of all 
the real friends of true representa- 
tive government to discover the most 
effective methods and processes for 
bringing these powers of the people 
into successful operation. The tend- 
ency now is toward specifying definite 
numbers of signers to I. and R. peti- 
tions instead of percentages of the 
voters. There are several reasons for 
this preference, one being that the 
adoption of woman suffrage in any 
state increases the size of the required 
petitions when on a percentage basis, 
but does not affect the size of the 
required petitions if they have prev- 
iously been put on the basis of a 
definite number. 

Some have advocated the direct ini- 
tiative, others the indirect initiative, 



26 



Equity 



but we want both. Different methods 
of obtaining publicity have been prac- 
ticed, but the efficient pamphlet con- 
taining arguments pro and con, mailed 
to every voter, is the best method. 
The safeguarding of petitions from 
fraud is still in its experimental stage. 

It is perfectly evident that the de- 
tails of this system of popular ex- 
pression by which the voters exercise 
their right to final control of their 
own public affairs are being improved, 
and it is natural and inevitable that 
they should be improved. 

Within the past year a number of 
new plans have been advanced by 
active advocates of the Initiative and 
Referendum which all who believe in 
the people's sovereignty should know 
about in order to render their best 
service to the movement. It is the 
special province of Equity to keep 
track of these developments and to 
present them fairly and impartially 
for the consideration of all. 

Legislators on I. and R. Petitions. 
"Workers for the I. and R. will be 
interested in the following two para- 
graphs of the amendment offered by 
Senator William J. Ogden, of Balti- 
more, in the 1914 session of the Mary- 
land general assembly. Unfortunately, 
Senator Ogden's excellent amendment 
was sadly mutilated and failed to pass 
the Senate. The following paragraphs 
provide for the use of the names of 
members of the legislature in their 
representative capacity, upon peti- 
tions, as follows: 

(d) The members of the General 
Assembly may sign The Initiative and 
Referendum petitions with the follow- 
ing- equivalents as to their representa- 
tive power in number of signatures. 
If for a proposed law, or the reference 
of an Act passed by the General Assem- 
bly, the signatures of a majority of 
the members' of the House of Dele- 
gates, together with the signatures of 



a majority of the Senators, shall be 
sufficient to complete a petition, and 
require the submission of the measure, 
if a Public General Law, to the voters 
of Maryland, or if a Public Local Law, 
to the voters of the County named, or 
of the City of Baltimore, as the case 
may be, for ratification or rejection; 
the signatures' of a majority of the 
members of either House shall be 
equivalent to one-half of the number 
of signatures of qualified voters re- 
quired to complete any such petition; 
if less than a majority of the members 
of either House sign the petition the 
signature of each member of such 
House shall be equivalent to a num- 
ber found by dividing the bare ma- 
jority of the membership of the House 
of which he is a member into half the 
number of signatures of voters de- 
clared in this Section to be sufficient 
to complete such a petition; provided, 
that the signatures of all the members 
of either House shall be equivalent to 
not more than half the number of 
signatures of voters sufficient to com- 
plete such a petition and require the 
submission of the measure. 

(e) In the case of a proposed 
Amendment to the Constitution, the 
signatures of three-fifths of the mem- 
bers of the House of Delegates, to- 
gether with the signatures of three- 
fifths of the Senators, shall be suffi- 
cient to complete a petition and re- 
quire the submission of the proposed 
Constitutional Amendment to the vot- 
ers of Maryland; the signatures of 
three-fifths of the members of either 
House shall be equivalent to one-half 
of the number of signatures of quali- 
fied voters required to complete such 
a petition; if less than three-fifths of 
the members of either House sign the 
petition, the signature of each member 
of such House shall be equivalent to 
a number found by dividing three- 
fifths of the membership of the House 
of which he is a member into 
half the number of signatures of 
voters declared in this Section to be 
sufficient to complete such a petition; 
provided, that the signatures of all 
the members of either House shall 
be equivalent to not more than half 
the number of signatures of voters to 
complete such a petition. 

This plan emphasizes the represent- 
ative capacity of the elected repre- 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



27 



sentatives in a very proper way, and 
it will impress most workers for the 
I. and R., even those of great exper- 
ience, as a new idea. But here ap- 
plies the old adage, "there is nothing 
new under the sun." 

In 1905, Mr. William A. Anderson, 
representing Benton County, in the 
Arkansas legislature, introduced an 
I. and R. amendment, providing for 
two kinds of Referendum, first, one- 
fourth of the members of either house could, 
by petition filed with the Secretary of State, 
force the reference of enacted or unenacted 
measures to the people; second, five thous- 
and electors could, by petition, compel the 
reference of acts. In the same session, 
the same gentleman introduced a 
resolution to the effect that if the 
Supreme Court declared any act of 
the legislature unconstitutional, then 
the governor must refer it to the 
electorate. If sustained by a majority 
vote, then the act should stand.* 
This was several years before Mr. 
Roosevelt proposed the recall of 
judicial decisions. Neither of these 
propositions were adopted by the 
legislature. 

The Massachusetts Plan. 
The I. and R. Amendment which 
came to a vote in the Massachusetts 
lower house on June 25 last and re- 
ceived 141 votes in the affirmative to 
85 in the negative, but which failed 
for lack of a two-thirds majority, was 
the product of the most experienced 
minds in both the Democratic and 
Progressive parties in Massachuetts 
and contained a number of novel fea- 
tures. A brief summary of this pro- 
posed amendment was published in 
the July Equity on page 136, but for 
the purposes of this review a restate- 



*See "Direct Legislation in Arkan- 
sas," by David Y. Thomas, Ph. D., 
Professor of History and Political 
Science, in the University of Arkansas, 
in the Political Science Quarterly for March 1914 



ment of the whole plan will be appro- 
priate for future reference. 

In general, this plan leaves the 
whole machinery of the existing gov- 
ernment virtually unchanged — legis- 
lative, executive and judicial, includ- 
ing the system of legislative com- 
mittee hearings for the public, the 
possibility of amendment, the present 
method of introduction in the legis- 
lature and the veto power of the 
governor. That is, all measures ini- 
tiated under this plan must first go 
to the legislature. Constitutional 
amendments must be introduced at 
two successive legislatures (Mass. 
has annual elections and annual ses- 
sions) accompanied by a petition with 
at least 50,000 signatures of voters, 
after which such amendments must 
be submitted to a Referendum vote 
whether the legislature and governor 
favor them or not. 

As to a proposed measure, not a 
constitutional amendment, but which 
may amend or repeal an existing law 
or propose a new one, at least 25,000 
signers to a petition for it are re- 
quired to insure its submission. The 
petition may be first proposed by five 
voters, who are thereafter to be de- 
signed the "proposers." On their 
motion the secretary of state is re- 
quired to prepare blanks with which 
subsequent signers may be secured. 
If the requisite number of signatures 
are obtained, the legislature then has 
the opportunity of enacting the pro- 
posed law without change or with 
such amendments as the committee of 
proposers may assent to; in which case 
no further action is taken under the 
Initiative petition. 

But if the legislature fails to sat- 
isfy the proposers, then the secretary 
of state first submits the proposed 
law to the state Supreme Court. If 



28 



Equity 



the court finds that it is unconstitu- 
tional then no submission is made. 
But if it is declared to be constitu- 
tional, the secretary of state is re- 
quired to submit the proposed law 
at the next regular election, when 
it may be enacted by a majority of 
those voting thereon. 

The destinctive feature of this plan 
is that of legislative hearings, and of 
amendment after full public dis- 
cussion, such amendment being satis- 
factory to the proposers. This is be- 
lieved to offer a practical remedy for 
those parts of existing I. and R. laws 
which may result in legislative crud- 
ities. 

At the same time the danger of 
going to the trouble and expense of a 
popular submission on a measure that 
will not stand the test of constitu- 
tionality before the highest state 
court is removed. It is thought to be 
better for the court to have its say 
before the measure may have been 
adopted at the polls. 

The Safeguarding of Petitions. 

In several of the states where 
amendments to the constitution for 
the exercise of the people's power 
have been put into operation, the 
question of safeguarding the initial 
process of their exercise, namely, the 
signing of petitions to initiate or refer 
measures, has been forced upon the 
attention of the people by flagrant 
instances of abuse or fraud. In a 
number of instances, notably in Cali- 
fornia and Washington, the orderly 
procedure of getting certain measures 
on the ballot has been greatly inter- 
fered with by having petitions taken 
into court for adjudication as to the 
legality of the signatures thereon. 

In Oregon a movement was fur- 
thered by former Senator Bourne look- 
ing to the prohibition of the use of 



paid circulators of petitions, but so 
far nothing practical has come of 
that, and the proposal is not generally 
approved by the friends of the Initi- 
ative and Referendum. 

But in Ohio the extra session of the 
legislature last winter adopted quite 
an elaborate system for the protect- 
ion of Initiative and Referendum 
petitions, in which this very question 
of what to do about the use of paid 
circulators was disposed of in a novel 
fashion (for a summary of this legis- 
lation see page 98 of the April 
Euity). It has been pretty generally 
understood that the fraudulent peti- 
tions which had been taken into court 
during the 1913 campaign in Ohio 
were the result of action dictated by 
the special privileged interests, with 
a view to bringing discredit upon the 
I. and R. system. The friends of that 
system decided that it was only 
necessary to find proper remedies and 
safeguards to insure the just opera- 
tion of the laws. 

Besides putting the whole machin- 
ery of the Initiative and Referendum 
under the corrupt practises act, and 
thereby making any person liable to 
criminal prosecution who misrepre- 
sents the contents of a petition, this 
law imposes a fine of $100 for the 
illegal signing of a petition, and a fine 
of $500 and a five-year prison sen- 
tence for the stealing or mutilation 
of petitions. Misstatements concern- 
ing petitions are specifically defined 
as perjury with a ten-year prison 
penalty. The secretary of state is 
given full power to determine the 
genuineness of petitions, and to con- 
duct hearings in cases of alleged 
fraud. Finally it requires that circu- 
lators of petitions in filing petitions 
must include sworn statements show- 
ing in detail the time spent and money 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



29 



earned in connection with this work. 
This is the answer of the Ohio law 
makers to those critics who advocate 
the prohibition of paid solicitors. 

A Novel Bill for South Africa. 

A friendly reader of Equity in far 
away Johannesburg, South Africa, 
has sent us the draft of "A Model 
Direct Legislation Bill for South 
Africa," which was published in the 
labor press and which contains a 
number of novel proposals. 

Right at the outset in its preamble 
this bill declares that it is desirable 
"for the welfare and progress of the 
Union of South Africa that the gov- 
ernment thereof should rest directly 
on the people." But curiously enough, 
owing to the existing allegiance of 
the union to the king of England, 
this law is proposed to be ''enacted 
by the King's most Excellent Majesty, 
and with the consent of the Houses 
of parliament, that the will of the 
People as declared by the Referen- 
dum, shall be binding on the Govern- 
ment of the Union, and have the full 
force of law." 

A bill upon any subject common to 
the four provinces would be initiated 
by a petition signed by 4% of the 
voters, one-fourth of whom must be 
registered in each province. 

Any bill passed by parliament may 
be referred to a vote of the people 
upon petition of 4% of the voters. 
But here appears the unusual propos- 
al that "one-tenth of the members of 
either house of parliament may de- 
mand that a bill be referred to a vote 
of the people. The annual budget is 
exempt from referendum as a whole, 
but any part that imposes fresh tax- 
ation or provides for a new expendi- 
ture may be referred separately. 

Another novel point is made in 
the emergency clause. When a 



bill is declared urgent by a two- 
thirds vote of both houses, and the 
speaker of the house declares that it 
is in his opinion to the public inter- 
est that it should go into effect at 
once, such bill shall be presented for 
the governor general's signature not- 
withstanding a Referendum petition. 
Still another unusual feature is the 
proposal that any bill (except money 
bills) which has passed one house 
may, in lieu of being sent to the other 
house, be submitted to a referendum. 
If the speaker considers that any 
bill to be submitted to the referendum 
is unduly complicated or involves 
more than one principle, he is author- 
ized to divide it into two or more sec- 
tions, and direct that separate votes 
shall be given thereon. This plan 
places the expense of the Referen- 
dum upon the government, and pro- 
vides for a publicity pamphlet with 
pro and con arguments, this pamphlet 
to be prepared by the speaker of the 
house. 



Efficient Government the Goal 

A government that expresses and 
represents at all times the desire and 
will of the people — that is what we 
want and all that we want in the way 
of change in governmental processes, 
"we" meaning all the citizens of this 
American republic who are now 
advocating the Initiative and Refer- 
endum, the Recall, the Short Ballot, 
Proportional Representation and other 
methods which are believed to be 
better than those now in use. 

We want these tools or instruments 
of government because we are con- 
vinced that with them, and by no 
other means, justice and fair dealing 
among men can prevail, and that only 
thus may society attain its highest 
possible development. 

If in any part of the country it 



30 



Equity 



happens that the effort to perfect the 
instruments of government has re- 
sulted so far in turmoil and change 
without definite gains and advantages, 
then we say simply that more effort 
must be made along more efficient 
lines. 

We do not defend all the various 
plans for improved government now in 
vogue in various states and cities, 
unless it can be shown by actual 
tests of experience that they do pro- 
duce good results. We who believe 
in the people and in real popular 
government are not wedded to any 
final form or method now in existence. 
We realize that all these proposed 
improvements in governmental pro- 
cedure are in a state of flux, out of 
which only experience can show the 
way to the final crystallization of 
form, and so to the goal of efficient 
government. 

For fear that some mistake may 
be made in the transitional stage in 
which we now find ourselves, we do 
not advocate a do-nothing or a let- 
us-alone policy; and therein lies the 
real and essential difference between 
us and our opponents comprising the 
forces of stand-pat-ism and reaction. 

When you see something working 
poorly in any existing process of 
direct legislation or in any new elect- 
oral process, understand that we are 
ready and eager to work with you or 
with any group of conscientious citi- 
zens to better that process or to try 
out some substitute. 

We realize that many of our state 
constitutions and city charters are 
full of useless timber or possess actual 
hindrances to efficient government and 
real progress of society. We want 
to help make those constitutions and 
those charters better, — to make them 
more efficient. 

We want our legislatures to be made 



more responsive to the popular will, 
our administrative forces more effici- 
ent and our judiciary more free from 
the baleful influence of Special Pri- 
vilege. How better can we bring 
these things, about than by taking into 
our own hands the powers of final 
control of both men and measures 
through the Initiative, Referendum 
and Recall. The fact that everywhere 
the bi-partisan political machines op- 
pose these improved processes proves 
that they are feared by the forces of 
evil. 

Into the minds of millions of readers 
of the daily and periodical organs of 
the so-called "invisible government" 
the poison of distrust and doubt and 
fear of any sort of change is being 
constantly poured. That is why pro- 
gress appears slow at times and why 
in some quarters the voters in their 
ignorance or blindness give the reins 
for a time into the very hands of their 
worst enemies. But that cannot be 
for long, and all the more it behooves 
us who see the light to work together 
toward the goal. 



"Going It Blind" 

Under this heading, the Philadelphia 
Saturday Evening Post recently called 
the attention of its immense audience 
to the one big and glaring defect in 
our American system of so-called 
popular government, as follows: 

It is strange that in a country so 
democratic as the United States there 
is no way of ascertaining- public opin- 
ion. Hardly ever do voters have a 
chance to declare their will on any na- 
tional issue. When the Commons pro- 
posed to tax land values, for example, 
and the Lords resisted there was an 
election on that particular question; 
and when the votes were counted no 
reasonable doubt remained that the 
famous Lloyd George Budget embodied 
the will of a majority of the British 
electorate. 

Nothing of that kind ever happens in 



The Initiative. Referendum and Recall Department 



31 



this country. Only by Inference can 
we say that the majority of voters fav- 
or tariff revision, for in the last presi- 
dential election the low-tariff party 
got only forty per cent, of the popular 
vote. Proponents and opponents of the 
trust measures now before Congress 
declare that those measures are tre- 
mendously important; but there is not 
a scrap of evidence that the majority 
of voters approve them. 

A well-organized, aggressive minor- 
ity will always make a much greater 
impression on politicians than an un- 
organized, lukewarm majority. Take 
the question of national prohibition, 
which is evidently coming to the fore. 
Congress may pass a resolution for a 
constitutional amendment because a 
dozen leaders guess that a majority of 
the people want it passed; or because 
a majority of the members — though 
not favoring it themselves and not be- 
lieving that a majority of the voters 
favor it — do believe that an aggressive 
prohibition minority will make effect- 
ual reprisals at the next congressional 
elections unless the resolution is passed. 

And the legislatures of three-fourths 
of the states may adopt the amendment 
on account of the same fear of an ag- 
gressive minority. Again, an aggres- 
sive, well-organized anti-prohibition 
minority in more than one-fourth of 
the states may defeat the amendment, 
though a decided majority of the na- 
tional electorate may favor it. 

Meantime there will be the most 
positive assertions that the majority of 
the people do want it and that the ma- 
jority do not want it. With small 
trouble and expense that question 
might be settled by letting voters 
make a cross opposite Tes or No at the 
next election. 

Why not? The answer that the 
people are ignorant or indifferent or 
venal or preoccupied will no longer 
serve to sidetrack this highly import- 
ant and inevitable question pertaining 
to self government in a republic like 
ours. Public policies which a consid- 
erable percentage of the people believe 
in are entitled to some decisive method 
of being disposed of as a part of the 
ordinary machinery of popular gov- 
ernment. That is the only way to 
keep the political atmosphere clear. 



Taf t's "Mission" and Some Facts 

"I want to show the young men 
of this country," says former Presi- 
dent Taft in a published interview re- 
ferring to a big series of lectures 
on the Initiative, Referendum and 
Recall, which he has engaged to de- 
liver during this winter, at a number 
of colleges, "the absurdity of having 
weary armies of voters tramping fre- 
quently to the polls* — at the call of 
would-be reformers — in a struggle 
for incessant changes in the laws. I 
want to emphasize the fact that this 
doctrine is an evil thing. I want to 
preach sanity and sense." 

This, then appears to be the mis- 
sion of our former president, now a 
Yale professor of constitutional law, 
namely, to lament the frequency of 
elections under the constitutional 
checks known as the Initiative, Refer- 
endum and Recall now operative in 
17 states and about 300 municipalities 
and to bemoan the sufferings of the 
"weary armies of voters." 

The distinguished professor is like 
Don Quixote setting lance against 
wind-mills, for he utterly ignores the 
facts of our experience. Take the 
record in one state, New Jersey, 
where nearly one-fourth of the in- 
habitants are living under the Initia- 
tive, Referendum and Recall process- 
es in the twenty-four municipalities 
which have taken advantage of the 
commission rule offered under the 
Walsh law within the past three 
years. Speaking of this the Newark, 
New Jersey, Evening News says: 

During these three years there has 
been but one recall attempted, in a com- 
munity of inconsiderable size, and that 
failed. In not one of the places so 
governed has there been an expressed 
desire to return to the old form. The 
initiative has been called into opera- 
tion but once, and there has been no 
test of the referendum alone. 



''The italics are ours. 



32 



Equity 



"The gun behind the door," as the 
initiative, referendum and recall fea- 
ture has been characterized, has been 
a handy weapon, in spite of the fact 
that it hasn't been discharged once, 
and has only been cocked a conple of 
times. The fact that it was within 
easy reach may have accounted for the 
careful manner in which commis- 
sioners have served their constituents. 
A good many of these commissioners 
are old-time politicians, but they are 
acting differently than they did under 
the old style of local rule. 

What has the professor to say to 
this? Does the sharp point of fact 
disturb the blind assurance of his 
a priori conclusion? 

But this New Jersey experience is 
not an isolated instance. It is direct- 
ly in line with the experience of other 
states in which cities have adopted the 
commission form of government in- 
cluding the Initiative, Referendum 
and Recall. In the October issue of 
the National Municipal Review the edi- 
tor of Equity, from special reports 
from local officials on the operation 
of the Initiative, Referendum and Re- 
call in 261 cities known to have one 
or more of these powers in their char- 
ters, drew these authoritative facts: 

Of these 261 municipalities, thirty- 
one have used the Initiative, twenty- 
six have used the referendum and 
twenty-seven have used the recall. 
Of the six that have the limited re- 
ferendum, one has used it on fran- 
chises. 

Further, of the 197 municipalities 
that possess all three of these powers, 
that is, the Initiative, Referendum 
and Recall, 137 have not used any of 
theml This does not harmonize with 
Mr. Taft's "weary armies of voters 
tramping frequently to the polls in 
a struggle for incessant changes in 
the laws." But the non-use of these 
powers in these municipalities does 
not argue that they are not of value. 
Careful observers agree that the ex- 



istence of these powers in the charter 
"impresses a sterner sense of duty 
and keener thoughts of responsibility 
in the minds of officials." 

Why Mr. Taft should ignore these 
facts is a mystery. Argument is not 
needed when facts speak so plainly. 
And the facts show that the people 
are well behaved and conservative; 
that they can be trusted with these 
powers; that they know how to make 
intelligent use of them, and that 
they do not abuse them. Mr. Taft's 
"weary armies" exist only in his 
imagination. A professor of consti- 
tutional law should consult facts. 

As for the operation of the 
state-wide Initiative and Referendum, 
what has been done is an open record. 
Professor Taft should know, if in- 
deed, he does not, that in all of the 
Initiative and Referendum amend- 
ments provision is made for submis- 
sion of measures to the voters only at 
regular elections.* 

Why has our great constitutional 
lawyer over-looked this important 
point? Or why does he mislead his 
followers into the belief that the Ini- 
tiative and Referendum cause fre- 
quent elections? Does he not keep 
informed concerning recent amend- 
ments of state constitutions? Let us 
repeat, in order to make it plain to 
all, that the state constitutions that 
have been amended to provide for the 
Initiative and Referendum require 
that propositions submitted for a di- 
rect vote shall be submitted only at 
regular elections; thus the number 
and frequency of elections are not at 
all affected. See the constitutions of 
South Dakota, Oregon, California, 
Colorado, Arkansas, Arizona, Maine, 
etc. 

In no instance to date has the Re- 
call been used successfully against a 
state official. This surely does not in- 






The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



33 



dicate that the existing percentages 
for Recall petitions is too low for 



If in certain states the tendency- 
has been to increase the number of 
measures to be voted on at a single 
election, that is a matter which the 
voters themselves will take care of in 
due time by bringing into action 
more responsive legislatures. It means 
that past legislatures have failed in 
their duty. 

While Equity stands as the special 
exponent of the nation-wide move- 
ment for popular control of govern- 
ment, and to that end insists that 
every state Constitution and every 
municipal charter should contain pro- 
vision for the possibility of final con- 
trol of the government by means of 
the Initiative, Referendum and Re- 
call, yet we want it distinctly under- 
stood by all that we confidently ex- 
pect the time to come when these 
powers will be seldom or never used, 
simply because our representatives 
will have become truly representative, 
which is all that can be desired. 

Our admiration for representative 
government cannot be exceeded by 
that of Mr. Taft himself; but repre- 
sentatives should not be entirely in- 
dependent of those whom they repre- 
sent. To insure true representation, 
constituents should be able to demand 
a direct vote on measures whenever 
a considerable number desire it. 
This perfects representative govern- 
ment. We desire such a perfect un- 
derstanding between representatives 
and their constituents that these di- 
rect powers will seldom or never 
need to be called into action. But 
the power to demand direct action 
on definite, isolated measures, should 
exist as the corner stone of pop- 
ular government; otherwise the 
power of government swings forever 
back and forth from one political 



group or party to another without the 
responsibility for any policy being 
definitely fixed. This is what makes 
the people "weary." 

Which horn of the dilemma will 
Professor Taft prefer when all the 
facts are in the reckoning? Will he 
continue to ignore them and convict 
himself of deliberate and foolish mis- 
representation ? or will he change his 
tune and frankly own up that he was 
mistaken in his premises? We hope, 
for his own sake, that he will do the 
latter. Time will tell. 



BOOK REVIEWS 



A Study of City Charter Making. 

"Applied City Government." By Prof. 
Herman G. James, associate professor 
of government and director of the Bur- 
eau of Municipal Research and Refer- 
ence at the University of Texas. Pub- 
lished by Harper and Brothers, New 
York, 1914. Price 75 cents, net. 

The plan of this little book is cer- 
tainly practical, and its style is clear 
and terse. It aims to present, article 
by article and section by section, the 
working model of an ideal city char- 
ter. At the end of each chapter in 
which some feature of city govern- 
ment is discussed, Prof. James offers 
his own conception of how the ideal 
charter would deal with that particu- 
lar subject. Thus a model is built up 
which must be very helpful to any 
city charter commission. 

Three short chapters deal with the 
charter powers and with the opera- 
tions of the electorate. The prefer- 
ential ballot, on the Grand Junction, 
Colo., plan, is strongly indorsed and 
proportional representation is referred 
to, but not as being of much value 
where the short ballot obtains. 

In chapter four Prof James disposes 
of "The Recall and Direct Legisla- 
tion" in a way that shows either 
unfamiliarity with the practise and 
experience of commission-governed 



34 



Equity 



cities or a distrust of the people. Re- 
versing the usual order, the author 
lays chief stress on the Recall and 
deals with the Initiative and Referen- 
dum last. He readily concedes that 
the possibility of the second term has 
hot prevented "unproper action" on 
the part of city officials. And he lets 
slip the dangerous admission that 
there was "no control over an officer 
who, not desiring re-election, was mak- 
ing the best of his power for improper 
purposes" (page 27). 

It may be fair to assume that at the 
time Prof. James wrote this book the 
facts as to the experience of our cities 
with this process of government were 
not in his possession, for the first 
approximately complete assembling 
of these facts was in the article, 
"Municipal Initiative, Referendum and 
Recall in Practice," prepared by the 
Editor of Equity and published in the 
October, 1914, Municipal Review. 

Prof. James frankly asserts that in 
fixing the number of signatures for a 
Recall petition, "the starting point 
will be to make it as high as possible 
without making the instrument wholly 
unusable," (page 29). He estimates 
that the average voting total is 70 
per cent of the total electorate, and 
concludes that "the natural require- 
ment would seem to be 35 per cent of 
that or one-half of the usual vote," 
(page 30). The experience of many 
cities now shows that with a petition 
based on 20 per cent or 25 per cent 
of the previous vote for the leading 
office, the number of Recall elections 
has been very few and that nowhere 
has the defeated minority turned on 
a successful candidate before giving 
him a fair trial. 

In this country there are over 350 
municipalities that have the commis- 
sion form of government; and nearly 
all of them have the Initiative, Refer- 



endum or Recall, and some municipali- 
ties not under the commission form 
of government have these powers. 
A majority (at least 200) have all 
three of these powers, while some 
have the Initiative and Referendum 
without the Recall, and vice versa, 
some have the Referendum only. Of 
all these municipalities, and for all 
the time they have possesssed these 
powers, a nation-wide investigation 
discovered that only 31 had used the 
Initiative, 26 the Referendum and 33 
the Recall. Further, 25 attempts to 
invoke the Recall have been made, but 
failed on account, of the promoters 
not being able to get sufficient number 
of signatures. This indicates that the 
securing of Recall signatures is not 
as easy as some theorists seem to be- 
lieve. Of the 33 Recall elections ac- 
tually held, 20 resulted in recall and 
13 resulted in re-election of the of- 
ficials sought to be recalled. 

The above results show a striking 
conservatism on the part of the vot- 
ers. They do not abuse these enlarged 
powers, but they use them to good 
purpose when there is occasion. The 
corruption that a few years ago made 
municipal government in America no- 
torious the world over would have 
been impossible if the voters of all 
municipalities had possessed the Ini- 
tiative, Referendum and Recall. 

In examining the uses of the Ini- 
tiative, Referendum and Recall in the 
various cities of the country, we do 
not find any indication that those cit- 
ies which have the lowest percentages 
have used these powers the most fre- 
quently. In fact, many whose require- 
ments are the lowest have not used 
these powers at all. Among those 
which have used these powers the 
most frequently can be found those 
which require the highest percentages. 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



35 



For example, Dallas, Tex., has made 
the most frequent and the most suc- 
cessful use of the Recall among all 
the cities that have the Recall, yet its 
Recall requirements is 35 percent, the 
highest percentage given, yet not 
quite as high as that recommended by 
Prof. James, namely, 35 per cent, of 
the entire electorate, whereas Dallas, 
Tex., requires 35 per cent "of the en- 
tire vote cast for candidates for the 
office of mayor on the final ballot at 
the last preceding general municipal 
election." Hence it seems that when 
there is occasion to invoke these pow- 
ers, they will be invoked even though 
the conditions are difficult; and easy 
conditions do not lead to the undue 
use of these powers. Here we have 
facts and experiences favoring low 
percentages. Facts and experience 
prove that low percentages do not lead 
to abuse of these powers. 

But extreme as is the conservatism 
of Prof. James on the Recall, his po- 
sition becomes even less tenable in 
what he advises concerning the Ini- 
tiative and Referendum. He admits 
the necessity of the Referendum as to 
constitution or charter making or 
amending and as to bond issues and 
franchise granting. But as to the use 
of the popular Initiative he is far 
from convinced, save as a means 
of "assuring representative govern- 
ment," but that is begging the whole 
question. Hence he reaches the con- 
clusion that the petition to invoke 
either the Initiative or the Referen- 
dum should be signed by 35 per cent, 
of the total electorate. 

This is to render the procedure un- 
necessarily difficult. Experience has 
shown that it is generally inoperative 
wherever the percentages for municip- 
al Initiative and Referendum have ex- 
ceeded 20 per cent, in small cities or 
have been more than 15 per cent, in 
the larger cities. 



Buffalo has just adopted a commis- 
sion charter with a Referendum pro- 
vision based on a petition requiring 
only 5 per cent, of the voters. 

For instance, the percentages 
adopted by Columbus are 6 per cent, 
for the Initiative and 12 per cent, for 
the Referendum. In the new St. 
Louis charter only 5 per cent, of the 
registered vote is required for the 
Initiative at a general election and 7 
per cent, at a special election. The 
Referendum is on a 7 per cent, basis, 
but the Recall percentage is 20. We 
feel certain that these percentages 
are entirely safe. 

It is clear therefore that Prof. 
James is widely at variance with the 
judgment of a large majority of the 
leading men of affairs in many cities 
who have actually constructed recent 
charters under the commission or city 
manager plans, and providing for the 
I., R. and R. checks. 



A Standpat Charter Guide. ^ 

"Municipal Charters." By Nathan 
Matthews, former Mayor of Boston and 
now a lecturer on municipal govern- 
ment at Harvard. Published by the 
Harvard University Press, 1914. Price 
$2, net. 

Here again the very commendable 
object is to present a working hand- 
book for the assistance of city legis- 
lators and charter makers. The first 
part deals with the "essentials of an 
American city charter," the second 
part presenting actual charter drafts 
and the third part notes on these 
charter drafts. 

Mayor Matthews does not keep the 
wary reader long in suspense as to the 
general character of the charter which 
he favors. On page 15 we find him 
saying that "The type of charter best 
adapted to the case would therefore 
seem to be the responsible executive 
type with a single small legislative 
board or council, with such checks 
and balances as will prevent the gross- 



36 



Equity 



er forms of extravagance and cor- 
ruption, and with such a concentra- 
tion of the several powers of the city 
government that at each succeeding 
election the voters may have no dif- 
ficulty in determining who is and who 
is not responsible for what has been 
done or left undone." 

He admits that "the single small 
commission has been shown to be a 
great improvement over the unwieldy 
ward elected city council and irre- 
sponsible committees which it sup- 
planted." Speaking of his preferred 
commission plan, his distrust of the 
people and unwillingness to pro- 
vide for their having any direct voice 
in their own government is evinced 
in the following statement: page 17: 
"No provision is made for the Initi- 
ative, the Recall, or the Referendum 
on petition. These features, found in 
most commission charters as well as 
in some others, are, in the writer's 
view, not only inconsistent with dem- 
ocracy as originated and hitherto prac- 
ticed in this country, but are inher- 
ently incapable of application to muni- 
cipal administration." 

This is the keynote of Mayor Mat- 
thews' section on "Direct Legislation" 
(pages 28 to 33). Therein he refers 
to the various questions which Ameri- 
can cities have almost always referred 
to popular vote, such as the adoption 
of charters, licensing the sale of 
liquors, the issuance of loans, amend- 
ments to charters, etc. But in all this 
there is no provision for any referen- 
dum upon the motion of the voters 
themselves; and the writer distinctly 
says he can see "no possibility of 
public gain from the application of 
this device to municipal administra- 
tion." He argues that whatever ad- 
vantages might come from such a 
referendum must follow from its ap- 



plication to questions of public policy, 
which ought to be left to the legis- 
lature, and which would not come 
before a city council. Further on 
(page 29) the author reverts to this 
matter by saying that "if there are 
administrative questions upon which 
the voters as a whole have an intelli- 
gent and decided opinion, there is 
no reason to fear that their views will 
be disregarded under any system of 
representative government provided 
the terms of office are not too long." 
What he has previously said of the 
Referendum he declares would apply 
with still greater force to the Initi- 
ative, and he is of the opinion that 
both are "inconsistent with the short 
ballot," and lead to the adoption, "by 
the unreflecting vote at a general 
election, of measures which could not 
command a majority at a special 
election." He reaches the conclusion 
that the result is "not a true express- 
ion of the popular will, but an untelli- 
gent and unintended exercise of popu- 
lar power," that repetition breeds in- 
difference, and that the Initiative in 
particular may be said to have created 
a new political disease which he calls 
"electoral fatigue," and which results 
in what is "virtually a government by 
minorities." 

All of which has a very familiar 
sound to the friends of genuine popu- 
lar government as being the same set 
of arguments that has been used over 
and over again by the opponents of 
the Initiative and Referendum, who 
fear that their adoption would endan- 
ger the power of the special interests 
which have obtained their strangle 
hold upon municipal and state gov- 
ernments thru bi-partism political 
machinery. Every one of these argu- 
ments has been fully demolished in 
the course of the great movement 
toward genuine democracy. Their 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 

repetition in this book simply proves 
that the author is not looking for real 
democratic government. 



37 



The March of 
Popular Government 



War and Insurance. 

By Josiah Royce, Professor of Moral 
Philosophy and Civil Politics, Har- 
vard University. Published by the 
Macmillan Co., New York. Price, $1. 

Prof. Royce offers a new solution 
of the war problem. In brief, it is 
that nations be insured against calam- 
ities, just as individuals are. The 
company would be necessarily inter- 
national, but entirely non-political. It 
would be conducted by an internation- 
al board composed of men of the high- 
est type, and fully competent as fiduc- 
iary officers. Nations only could be 
insured, not individuals. They would 
be insured against such natural ca- 
lamities as earthquakes and volcanic 
eruptions, certain pestilences, destruc- 
tive storms, famines and great crop 
failures, marine disasters, and final- 
ly, possibly, against war losses. His 
argument is that this would be a new 
force, binding the nations together in 
mutual protective interest, and that 
much more than the mere insurance 
would develop therefrom. 

The arguments set forth for the 
plan are convincing. Certainly the 
nations need all the forces that can 
be created for binding them together 
into a closer community of mutual in- 
terest. Individuals forming a mutual 
insurance company do not destroy one 
another. They are interested in 
mutual protection and longevity. A 
mutual insurance company in which 
the members are nations, presumably 
would modify the savage and selfish 
attitude now generally maintained 
among nations. The closer mutual 
interest would tend strongly to harm- 
onize international relations, and 
hence make war a vanishing prospect. 



Arizona 

Matters of very great importance, 
as bearing on both the immediate and 
distant future of the people of Ari- 
zona, were resolved by the voters of 
that state on November 3rd. From 
the standpoint of popular interest, 
prohibition was probably the leading 
issue, the question of capital punish- 
ment possibly second to that and sev- 
eral radical labor propositions high in 
line, as shown by the ballot totals. 
The official summary of results as to 
all of the 19 propositions will be 
found in the accompanying table. 

But to the student of government, 
and especially the believer in popular 
government, the question of greatest 
interest in this election was the prop- 
osition to strike out of the constitu- 
tion the right and power of the gov- 
ernor or legislature to veto measures 
that have received the approval of 
a majority of the electors. (See Page 
173 of October Equity). On this ques- 
tion opinion appears to have been 
closely divided, as it was approved 
by a majority of only 83 votes in a 
total of 33,051. 

Although the reaction wave noted 
in many other states did not cut 
much figure in Arizona, there was 
evidence of discrimination in the re- 
sults of the voting in this state. For 
instance, while there was a majority 
of 3,144 for prohibition, the plan to 
prevent prohibition elections oftener 
than once in eight years was defeated 
by 10,378 majority. The radical labor 
measures approved decisively, were: 
fixing a maximum passenger rate for 
railroads, prohibiting black-listing, 
old age and mothers' pensions, to es- 



38 



Equity 

Summary of November 3rd, 1914 Votings on Measures 



Arizona 


Origin 


Yes 


No 


Majority 
For 


Majority 
Against 


Percent. 
Total 
Vote 


Highest Total Vote for Candi- 
dates, 48,466 
1. State- wide prohibition 


i 

Leg. Amend. 
Leg. Amend. 
Leg. Amend. 
Leg. Amend. 

Leg. Amend. 
Ref. Stat. 

Ref. Stat. 

Ref. Stat. 
Ref. Stat. 

Init. Stat. 

Init. Stat. 
Init. Stat. 
Init. Stat. 

Init. Stat. 
Init. Stat. 

Init. Stat. 
Init. Stat. 

Init. Stat. 
Init. Stat- 


25,887 
16,059 
13,215 
14,701 

16,567 
15,425 

20,968 

10,756 
14,255 

18,129 

13,842 
18,207 
25,827 

10,995 
25,017 

13,023 
18,871 

16,754 
5,878 


22,743 
26,437 
23,499 
17,994 

16,484 
13,554 

12,210 

21,152 

17,740 

19,381 

15,934 
17,444 
12,394 

22,434 
14,323 

21,277 
12,256 

15,853 
30,055 


3.144 




100 


2. Limiting prohibition elections 


10,378 

10,284 

3,293 


87 


3. A $5,000,000 highways bond 
issue 




75 


4. Creating a state reclamation 
service 




67 


5. Depriving the governor and 
legislature of the right to veto 
I. or R. measures approved 


83 
1,871 

8,758 


68 


6. To establish a penal code 




59 


7. Fixing a maximum passenger 
intrastate railroad rate 




68 


8. Relating to the creation of 


10,396 
3,485 

1,252 

2,092 


65 






66 


10. To abolish the penalty of 
death for crime 




77 


11. As to semi-annual payment 




61 




763 
13,433 

10,694 . 


73 






78 


14. Participation in Panama 


11,439 


68 


15. Requiring that 80 per. cent. 
of employees must be Amer- 


81 


16. Enabling property owners to 
assess their own property, 
the state reserving right to 


8.254 


70 


17. Regulating the erection of 


6,615 
901 


64 


18. Establishing a contract sys- 
tem a state banking system 
and printing plant 




67 


24.177 


74 









tablish a contract system, a State 
printing plant, and banking system, 
and requiring that at least 80 per 
cent, of the employees of any corpor- 
ation or individual must be American 
citizens. 

This last law has attracted general 
attention, owing to the talk of a legal 
test of it in the courts, and the fact 
that foreign treaty rights of the na- 
tion are said to be involved. Several 
powers have made representations on 
the subject to the government at 
Washington. 

The refusal of the voters to sanc- 
tion the abolition of the death penalty, 
by the close margin of 1,252 votes, 
forced an unpleasant dilemma on Gov- 



ernor Hunt, who favored the amend- 
ment. A number of condemned mur- 
derers awaiting the result of this vote 
were soon reprieved by the Governor, 
who thus resolved to avoid the of- 
ficial responsibility for their execu- 
tion. The Chicago Public has drawn 
attention to the effect of such action 
as furnishing an opportunity for the 
reopening of the issue under the op- 
eration of the State-wide Recall. 

Arkansas 

The adoption of a generally accept- 
able child-labor law, in Arkansas by 
a 3 to 1 vote on Sept. 15, was made 
possible by the Initiative after the 
legislature had repeatedly refused 
to act. This was generally regarded 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



39 



by many people as an instance of the 
value of the Initiative. 

In spite of this instance, it now ap- 
pears that the State Federation of 
Labor has been pushing a movement 
for an amendment to the State con- 
stitution making radical changes in 
the existing I. and R. amendment or 
a system to replace it. Instead of 
the present 8 per cent, basis of the 
Initiative, the definite requirement of 
10,000 voters is proposed, and like- 
wise 7,000 voters for the Referendum 
in place of the present 5 per cent. 
One clause of this plan strikes at the 
power of the court as well as that 
of the legislature. It says that no 
measure approved by vote of the 
people "shall be set aside in whole or 
in part as unconstitutional by a de- 
cision of the Supreme Court of the 
state." Another paragraph provides 
that the Governor of the state or 
Mayor of a city may not veto a meas- 



ure adopted by the voters. Also it is 
provided that the failure of the courts 
to decide a question as to the suffic- 
iency of a petition shall not prevent 
the measure involved from being 
placed on the ballot. Provision is 
made for laws to prevent fraud in 
the circulation or signing of petitions, 
but the use of paid circulators is not 
to be forbidden. The requirement 
that signatures to petitions be distri- 
buted in the counties or other poli- 
tical divisions of the state is barred. 
Another Initiative measure, which 
was approved, 3 to 1, by the voters at 
this election, is known as the Public- 
ity Act. It provides for having meas- 
ures submitted under the I. and R. 
published in various local newspapers 
throughout the state. Measures sub- 
mitted by the legislature to increase 
salaries of its members and fix the 
salary of the Governor failed. See 
table herewith. 



Arkansas 


Origin 


Yes 


No 


Majority 
For 


Majority 
Against 


Per cent . 
Total 
Vote 


1. Child labor 


Init. Stat. 

Init. Stat. 
Init. Amend. 
Ref .Amend. 
Ref .Amend. 


72,313 
55,552 
54,782 
43,919 
46,572 


25,300 
40,728 
40,441 
49,101 
45,206 


47,013 
14,824 
14,341 




.J. . 


2. Using newspaper publicity 
for public measures or acts. . 






3. Municipal bonds author- 
ization 




O <U 


4. Fixing the salary of members 
of legislature 


5,182 


9 c 


5. Election of lieutenant 

governor 


1,366 


> m 
•8 nj 






H-T3 



California 

Any candid person who takes the 
trouble to scan the two long columns 
of figures representing the "yes" and 
"no" votes on the 48 measures, which 
were submitted to the voters of Cali- 
fornia on November 3rd, must admit 
that here at least there was discrim- 
ination in the voting, just as there 
was a remarkable degree of irregu- 
larity in the voting on candidates. 

For instance, the election of the 
Progressive Governor Johnson by the 



enormous majority of 150,000 was ac- 
companied by the choice of the Demo- 
cratic candidate for United States 
senator, ex-Mayor Phelan. Party 
lines appeared to be almost gone. The 
enormous totals of votes cast for and 
against the various measures betoken 
the tremendous interest aroused by 
the campaign preceding the election, 
in the course of which the official pub- 
licity pamphlet, consisting of 112 
pages, containing the texts of the var- 
ious measures, arguments pro and 



40 



Equity 



con and a brief summary for conven- 
ient reference, was sent to all voters 
by the Secretary of State. 

While it is true enough that this 
California ballot was overloaded, the 
fact should not be lost sight of (as 



was pointed out in the October 
Equity) that 27 of the 48 measures 
were placed there by the legislature, 
commenting on which the San Bern- 
ardino Index says: 

"Whether or not they (the legi^la- 



Summary of Nov. 3, 1914, Votings on Measures 



California 


Origin 


Yes 


No 


Majority 
For 


Majority 
Against 


Per cent 
Total 
Vote 


1. Calling Convention for Re- 


Leg. Stat, 
[nit. Amend 

Init. Stat. 

Ref. Stat. 

Ref. Stat. 

Ref. Stat. 
Leg. Amend. 

Leg. Amend. 

Init. Stat. 
Init. Amend 

Init. Stat. 
Leg. A mend. 

Init Amend 
Init. Stat. 

Init Amend. 

Leg . Amend 

Leg. Amend 
Ref. Stat. 

Int. Amend. 
Init. Stat. 

Init. Amend. 
Init. Stat. 

Leg. Amend. 

Leg. Amend. 

Leg. Amend 

Leg. Amend. 
Leg. Amend. 
Leg. Amend. 

Leg. Amend. 

Leg . Amend. 

Leg. Amend. 
Leg. Amend. 
Leg. Amend. 
Leg. Amend. 

Leg. Stat... 

Leg. Stat. 


180,111 
355,536 
282,692 
402,629 
343,805 
309,950 
267,618 

359,176 

249.500 
405.375 

483,020 
271,896 

312,193 

244,855 

236,573 

259,192 

390.835 
353,295 

293,019 
413,741 

248,112 


442,687 
524,781 
560,881 
352,821 
288,084 
301,817 
375,634 

301,969 

353,812 
374,487 

239,332 
274,325 

337,951 
390,333 

324.558 

307,155 

202,128 
361,446 

287,185 
327,569 

318.224 




262,576 
169,245 
278,189 


u 


2. Prohibition 










"o 




49,808 

55,721 

8,133 


5. Investment Companies Act. . 




c 




(J 


7. Local Taxation Exemption . . 

8. Exempting Vessels from Tax- 


8,016 


14 


57,207 


a 
•>* 


9. Regulating Investment Com- 


104,312 


a 


10. Abolition of Poll Tax 


30,888 
243,688 




11. University of California 

Building Bond Act 




r*5 


2,429 

25,758 
145,478 

87,985 

47,963 


c 


13. Qualification of Voters at 




oo 

g 


14. Voting by Absent Electors 

15. Deposit of Public Mon- 




o 




•o 


16. Condemnation for Public 




(B 


17. Exposition Contribution by 


188,707 


00 

s 


18. Non-Sale of Game. . . 


8,151 


u 


19. Consolidation of City and 

County, and Limited Annex- 
ation of Contiguous Territory 

20. Prohibiting Prize Fights 

111. City and County Consolida- 
tion and Annexation with 
consent of annexed Terri- 


5,834 
86,172 


3 

- . 

a 2 




a % 


70.112 


Is 


12 Land Title Law 


359 757 ' ??4.«4fi 


134,911 


5 S 


23. Elections by Plurality, Pre- 
ferential Vote and Primary. . 

24. Assembly Pay Roll Ex- 


240,600 
87,315 
285,338 

335,047 
261,219 
291,665 

284,757 

349,684 

291,836 
404,283 
231,724 
344,433 
294,928 
300,028 


294,265 
494,272 
226,679 

216,865 
225,530 
260,589 

214,312 

185,168 

244,379 
190,969 
278,129 
216,612 
267,717 
257,119 


53,665 
406,957 


o 5 




5*8 


25. Adoption and Amendment of | 

Municipal Charters 

26. Legislative Control of Irriga- 
ation, Reclamation and 


58,659 

118,182 
35,689 
31,076 

70,445 

164,516 

47,457 
213,314 








27. County Charters 

28. Regulation of Public Utilities 

29. Incorporation of Munici- 




ei cn 




•O >c 




eO - 


30. Irrigation Districts Controll- 
ing International Water 




u 5 

IS 


31. Valuation of Condemned 
Public Utilities by Rail- 




32. Election of United States 




2 ° 


33. Public Utilities in Munici- 


46,405 




34. Taxation of Public 


127,821 
27.211 
42,909 


■sl 

SB'S 


35. Sacramento State Build- 




36. For the San Francisco 

State Building Act 










The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



41 



California Continued 



Origin 



Yes 



No 



Majority 
For 



Majority 
Against 



Per cent 
Total 

Vote 



37. For the State Fair Grounds 

Bonds 

38. Los Angeles State Build- 
ing Bonds 

39. Suspension of Prohibition 

Amendment 

40. Extra Sessions of District 
Courts of Appeal 

41. Miscarriage of Justice 

42. Place of Payment of Bonds 
and Interest 

43. Exempting Educational 

Institutions from Taxation. 

44. Minimum Wage 

45. One Day of Rest in Seven . . 

46. Creating Board Regulating 

Drugless Practice 

47. No Prohibition Elections for 
Eight Years 

48. For the San Francisco Har- 
bor Improvement Act 

of 1913 



Leg. Stat. 

Ink. Stat. 

Init. Amend 

Leg. Amend. 
Leg. Amend. 

Leg. Amend. 

Leg. Amend. 

Leg. Amend. 

Init. Stat. 

Init. Stat. 

Init. Amend. 

Leg. Stat... 



259,721 

285,796 

448,648 

203,674 
378,237 

306,195 

331,599 
379,311 
290,679 

223,217 

355,394 

408,633 



301,764 

320,302 

226,688 

322,891 
182,073 

206,479 

293,721 
295,109 
457,890 

462,355 

435,701 



42,043 
34,506 



221,960 



119,21' 



196,164 
99,716 



37,878 
84,202 



167,211 

239,138 

80.407 



167,589; 241,044 



tors) deliberately endeavored to so en- 
cumber the ballot that the people of 
the state would tire of their new right 
is problematical. If they did so en- 
deavor, they failed of their purpose. 
The initiative, referendum and recall 
have come to stay. So has the prim- 
ary election; so have the various great 
economy-compelling commissions of 
the state, the workmen's compensation 
act, and non-partisanship in state and 
county elections It is good." 

The same paper says there is every 
reason to believe that the people vot- 
ed intelligently upon the mass of 
measures given them. Likewise thinks 
the Los Angeles Outlook, which says 
that "the painstaking care with which 
citizens voted on the 48 long proposi- 
tions justified the initiative and refer- 
endum." The Outlook says that this 
election was a test of the Initiative 
and Referendum "at their absolute 
worst, and even by that test the new 
system has evidently justified itself." 
It points out that if they can get a 
simpler constitution which will rid 
them of the flood of amendments, and 
then improve the I. and R. in the light 
of experience, people will wonder why 
they ever doubted the value of the 
system of direct control. 

In reply to the superficial criticism 



that not one in a thousand voters un- 
dertook to gain any extended know- 
ledge of the 48 propositions, the San- 
ta Barbara Press makes the very per- 
tinent observation that these same 
critics have always harped on the 
idea that it is eminently desirable to 
instruct the rank and file of the voters 
in matters of legislation and govern- 
ment. The large and discriminating 
vote on these various measures proves 
conclusively that the people of Cali- 
fornia have done a lot of studying. 

The accompanying table will supply 
the complete figures as to the results 
of this election, but some of the more 
important features may be briefly 
referred to here. Not only was state- 
wide prohibition defeated by a major- 
ity of 169,245, but also the proposition 
to prevent a resubmission of the 
question for eight years by a majority 
of 80,407. A number of the measures 
enacted by the Progressives, such as 
the red light abatement, blue sky, 
creating a water commission and the 
non-sale of game, were sustained by 
decisive majorities; but on the other 
hand the radical 8-hour law proposed 
by the labor organizations and So- 
cialists was snowed under by the 
enormous majority of 278,189. Steps 



42 



Equity 



were taken toward a more vigorous 
regulation of public utilities, but the 
measures looking toward the taxation 
of land values were rejected. Prize 
fighting was made illegal. The cre- 
ation of a board to regulate drugless 
practice was defeated by a very large 
majority. 

The proposal to authorize a law es- 
tablishing a minimum wage for wom- 
en and minors was adopted by the 
considerable majority of 84,202. Thus 
we see the same electorate rejects one 
labor proposal and adopts another. 
The proposal for one day of rest in 
seven failed by a very large majority. 

Woman Vote Doubles Petition. 

One of the notable effects of this 
year's election is the automatic doubl- 
ing of the number of signatures that 
will be required for state Initiative 
and Referendum petitions in future. 
This became apparent upon the publi- 
cation of the official returns showing 
the total vote for governor, upon 
which the 5 per cent, petition for the 
Referendum and the 8 per cent, for 
the Initiative are computed. The gov- 
ernorship total is 926,776, of which 
5 per cent, is 46,339 and 8 per cent, 
is 74,143. 

Prior to this year the percentages 
for the I. and R. petitions were com- 
puted upon the governorship vote of 
1910, which was before the adoption 
of the suffrage amendment. 

Here we have the tangible illustra- 
tion of the objection to the use of the 
percentage basis for I. and R. peti- 
tions and the advantage of using a 
definite number of signatures as the 
basis. Merely by the addition of the 
woman vote in any state, the petition 
requirement is made very much more 
difficult of application. Certainly the 
difficulty is increased entirely out of 
proportion to any necessity or dan- 
ger. Friends of the Initiative and 
Referendum should make note of the 



experience of California in making 
plans for I., and R. amendments in 
other states. 

During the last quarter a number 
of municipalities in this state have 
been engaged in the consideration 
or adoption of new charters or amend- 
ments to old ones, all of which in- 
cline toward either the commission or 
city manager plans. Among the cit- 
ies that have adopted new charters 
are Bakersfield and Santa Monica. 
The Bakersfield charter contains pro- 
vision for the Initiative, Referendum 
and Recall, all on the basis of 25 per 
cent, petitions, which is unnecessar- 
ily difficult of operation. The board 
of freeholders of San Diego has 
drawn up a charter for that city in 
which the Initiative is based upon a 
20 per cent, petition, and the Refer- 
endum on a like percentage and a 25 
per cent. Recall provision. Los An- 
geles is greatly stirred up over the 
proposal of ten amendments to its 
charter embodying the city manager 
plan, which was to be submitted at an 
election on December 31, but about 
the holding of which there is some 
doubt at this writing owing to the 
opposition in the city council. 

An item of personal news from Los 
Angeles, of special interest to the 
readers of Equity and all friends of 
the I., R. and R., is the announced 
retirement of Dr. John R. Haynes as 
head of the Civil Service Commission of 
that city. Dr. Haynes, who is one of the 
Editorial Counsellors of Equity, has 
been generally recognized as the fa- 
ther of the Recall in California be- 
cause he drafted and was largely in- 
strumental in the adoption of the first 
Recall amendment, for the city of Los 
Angeles, in 1903. Los Angeles by 
that act was the first city in the Uni- 
ted States to incorporate the Recall 
into its organic law, and probably the 
first in the world to possess such a 
feature, and the first to use the same. 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



43 



Dr. Haynes, as President of the Cali- 
fornia Direct Legislation League, has 
recently published over his signature 
quite an extended article on the 
abuses of the existing I., R. and R. 
amendment and suggesting remedies 
for them. This comes too late to be 
discussed in this issue of Equity but 
it will receive due attention in the 
April issue. 

Colorado 

Efforts to alter or improve the Ini- 
tiative and Referendum amendment in 
the Colorado constitution, which took 
definite form as propositions for the 
voters to decide at the recent elec- 
tion, proved unavailing. The Colorado 
Social Service League, of which Judge 
Lindsey is the head, was particularly 
interested in proposition No. 4 which 



aimed to extend the power of the peo- 
ple under the I. and R. amendment by 
making a 25 per cent petition the 
authority for a special election at 
which to submit one or more measures, 
and also giving the governor power to 
call such special election at his option. 
This measure was defeated, two to 
one. 

Another initiated amendment, which 
headed the November 3 ballot, pro- 
posed to change the existing law by 
providing that any measure having 
been rejected at one election could 
not be submitted again to the voters 
within six years. This also was re- 
jected by about two to one. 

A third proposed amendment to the 
I. and R. law, but which failed by a 
margin of only about 2000 votes, was 
intended to permit a change in the 



Summary of Nov. 3, 1914, Votings on Measures 



Colorado 



Origin 



Yes 



.. Majority 

No For 



1. Proposing a 6 year interval 
for submission of the same 
proposition a second time. . . 

2. State-wide Prohibition 

3. Permitting a three-fourths 
jury verdict in civil cases 
and permitting women on 
juries 

4. Enabling 25 per cent, of vot 

ers to demand a special elec 
tion for submission of a 
measure and authorizing 
governor to call such elec- 
tion at will 

5. To codify laws relating to 

women and children 

6. Permitting probation for min 
ors and first offenders 

7. For better roads 

8. Making newspapers public 

utilities 

9. For a public utilities com- 

mission 

10. Licensing commission mer- 

chants 

11. Relieving workmen of indus- 
trial risk 

12. Special provision for addi- 

tional peace officers 

13. Increasing powers of public 
utility commission 

14. Municipal indebtedness 

15. Creating boards to equalize 
taxation 

16. Permitting change in manner 
of publishing measures to be 
voted on 



Init. Amend. 
Init. Amend. 



Init. Amend. 



Init. Amend 

Init. Amend.l 

Init. Amend.l 
Init. Amend.! 

Init. Amend. 1 

Ref. Stat. ! 

Ref. Stat. 

Ref. Stat. 

Ref. Stat. 

Ref. Stat. 
Leg. Amend. 

Leg. Amend. 
Leg. Amend. 



55,667 
129,589 



67,130 



40,643 

68,242 

62,561 
117,146 

35.752 ! 

39,703 

39,448 

69,006 

49,116 

37,633 
38,589 

55,987 
48,301 



112,537 
118,017 



77,488 



80,977 

72,122 

68,512 
54,844 

91,426 

65,182 

67,454 

60,298 

66,836 

63,603 
65,206 

55,275 
56,259 



Majority | Per cent 
Against I Total 
Vote 



11,572 



62,302 



8,708 



56,870 



10,358 



40,334 
3,880 
5,951 



55,674 
25.479 
28,006 



17,720 



25,970 
26,617 



7,958 



o "2 
> 5 



o -c 

s * 2 

^ a !2 

^% 
««£ 

S »C o 
. ■"* *» 
b <n c 

to § u 

_ -o o 

73 « * 

*± u ** 

5 « 3 

** > o 

-u ,a 

SS rt 

J3 % O 

x s a 
SI 



44 



Equity 



manner and cost of publishing mea- 
sures, the intention being to require 
the publication of each measure ini- 
tiated and adopted by, or referred to, 
the people along with the laws of the 
general assembly. This amendment 
also proposed to limit the number of 
amendments offered by the general 
assembly to six at one session. 

From such information as we have 
been able to obtain, the failure of 
these proposed improvements in the 
popular legislative process was con- 
nected with the general reaction ex- 
perienced in other states. Doubtless 
many voters completely lost sight of 
them in the heat of the campaign con- 
cerning the prohibition amendment. 
The vote on prohibition almost equaled 
the highest total for candidates, or 
253,218 votes, which were cast for 
United States senator, as will be seen 
by reference to the accompanying 
table. The prohibition amendment 
was one of five measures receiving an 
affirmative majority out of the entire 
sixteen submitted, the others being a 
bill to relieve workmen of assuming 
industrial risk, creating boards of 
equalization to adjust tax burdens and 
to increase taxes for the benefit of 
roads. 

The more important propositions 
that went into the discard, in addition 
to the I. and R. measures above refer- 
red to, were as follows: Permitting a 
% jury verdict in civil cases and per- 
mitting women to serve on juries, per- 
mitting probation of minor offenders, 
making newspapers public utilities 
and creating a public utilities com- 
mission. 

One of the curious features of the 
Colorado campaign was a sort of legal 
hair-splitting controversy as to the 
effect of a clause in the prohibition 
amendment providing that if the 
amendment carried it was not to go 
into effect until January 1, 1916, or 
about 13 months after the vote could 



be canvassed. There was also the 
proviso that "all laws or parts of 
laws in conflict with this amendment 
are hereby repealed." 

Before the election the "Wets" con- 
tended that the I. and R. amendment 
was in direct conflict with this proviso, 
as that amendment requires that laws 
adopted by the voters shall go into 
effect within 30 days. Hence it was 
held that the proviso in the prohibi- 
tion amendment would repeal the 
whole I. and R. law. Said "wets," in 
the hope of defeating prohibition, 
loudly warned the people against the 
danger of wiping out their pet law 
for controlling legislation. 

Now that prohibition is adopted, 
the shoe is on the other foot, for the 
'Wets" are dependent on the exis- 
tence of the I. and R. amendment for 
making any future attack on prohi- 
bition. However, the legal experts 
appear to be agreed that the repeal- 
ing proviso above referred to was 
meant to apply to the local option 
statute or other measures dealing 
with the liquor question. 

Georgia 

All of the ten amendments submit- 
ted by the legislature of Georgia re- 
ceived a majority of those voting 
thereon and were adopted, but all of 
them related to subjects that have 
no proper place in the frame of gov- 
ernment. Several provided for new 
county lines, one for the representa- 
tion of new counties created, others 
extending the term of representatives, 
increasing the pay of a superior 
court judge, providing 4-year terms 
for elected county officers, to abolish 
the office of county treasurer and to 
abolish the justice courts of Savan- 
nah. All of these matters, under the 
right kind of constitution, would be 
disposed of by means of simple stat- 
utes. To do these things by amend- 
ment is a cumbersome and expensive 
process at best. 






The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



45 



Indiana 

The situation in the Hoosier state, 
while far from satisfactory, is full of 
hope for a readjustment despite the 
fact that the election went against the 
proposal for a constitutional conven- 
tion. The following interesting report 
has been received bearing on this sit- 
uation: 

The Citizen's League of Indiana 
728 Shoaf Building 
Fort Wayne, Ind., Dec. 15, 1914 
Editor of Equity: 

The referred question of calling a 
Constitutional Convention for Indiana 
in 1915 received 235,140 "Yes" votes 
at the November election; 338,947 
votes were cast in the negtaive, and 
71,972 electors who voted for United 
States Senator did not vote on this 
question. The advocates of a new 
constitution for Indiana are heartily 
encouraged over the showing made 
under the peculiar difficulties encount- 
ered, and they are vigorously pressing 
the demand for a re-submission of the 
question at the general election in 
1916. 

While the negative majority includ- 
ed all the liquor vote of the state, the 
unnaturalized foreign vote and all 
elements subject to the influence of 
"special interests," it also included a 
very large vote that cannot be re- 
garded as an opposition expression 
at all. The full import of the propo- 
sition was but little understood by 
great numbers of well meaning citi- 
zens in all communities of the state. 
Political speakers generally avoided 
it, and it received very little attention 
from the press. It was clouded by 
the "jokers" in the Submission Act 
and by the manner in which the elec- 
tion was conducted. It was also con- 
fused with the referred proposal to 
appropriate $2,000,000.00 for a Cen- 
tennial Building. Under these cir- 
cumstances the argument of "ex- 
pense" was very effective. 



The well meaning citizen who held 
it safest to vote "No" because of un- 
certainty, is now willing to have the 
question re-submitted so that it may 
receive adequate consideration. The 
situation is subject entirely to educa- 
tional treatment. The need of con- 
stitutional revision is very apparent, 
and can only be met by a convention. 
The Stotsenberg proposals, the so- 
called '"twenty-two lost amendments," 
which went through the last legisla- 
ture without appearing in the Acts, 
are looked upon by far sighted citizens 
as a part of a far-reaching conspiracy 
to completely defraud the people in 
the matter of constitutional reform. 
They tend to increase vastly both the 
general and the special powers of the 
legislature, without making this body 
more responsive to the people. 

Five of these amendments simply 
lengthen the terms of state, county 
and township officers without making 
any improvement in administration 
according to modern needs. Three of 
them authorize the legislature to cre- 
ate new courts and increase the num- 
ber of judges without in any manner 
seeking to simplify judicial procedure. 
One proposal makes vague provision 
for suffrage without affecting the 
qualification of present voters and 
withoutSmproving registration and the 
elective system, giving no opportunity 
to the people to pass upon the ques- 
tion of equal suffrage, educational 
test or poll tax requirements. They 
extend the veto power of the governor, 
and admit colored men to the militia. 
The proposal to remove the two per 
cent debt limit conditioned upon what 
is "necessary or convenient for the peo- 
ple" does not place the initiative with 
the people and the taxpayers affected. 
They authorize the legislature to alter 
or amend charters of all corporations; 
to fix qualifications for lawyers; to 
pass a compulsory compensation act 
applicable to "hazardous employ- 



46 



Equity 



ments;" to classify property for tax- 
ation; to pass laws providing for the 
Initiative, Referendum and Recall, 
but forever prohibiting the recall of 
the judiciary, and to adopt special 
charters for cities. No Initiative or 
review are given the people in these 
important matters. The last two at 
least are regarded as absolutely vici- 
ous and reactionary, amounting to 
betrayal in the guise of reform. 

By legislative-made special char- 
ters for cities, municipal government 
in Indiana would be placed more com- 
pletely than ever at the mercy of a 
state political machine; and by legis- 
lative-made Initiative, Referendum and 
Recall, any extension of direct popu- 
lar government would be subject to 
the absolute control of so-called rep- 
resentatives agaist whom it might be 
directed. 

There are some who consider the 
proposal to change the mode of amend- 
ment desirable, since it provides that 
a proposed amendment, upon passing 
one Legislature, may be submitted to 
the voters, to be determined by a ma- 
jority vote thereon. The objection to 
this is that it still leaves all Initiative 
with the legislature, and authorizes 
political parties to make proposed 
amendments a part of the party tick- 
et. Furthermore this proposal con- 
tains a provision that no new consti- 
tution can be made until, by virtue of 
an act of the legislature, a majority 
of all legal voters of the state may 
declare for convention, and that then 
the convention may be held as the 
legislature may provide, and that the 
constitution so prepared may be sub- 
mitted as the legislature may order. 

Let it be remembered that the peo- 
ple had no voice whatever in framing 
any of these proposals. It is certain- 
ly clear that the general purpose 
back of them is to strengthen the 
strangle-hold of state political organ- 



izations through the legislature, and 
to further deprive the people of the 
control of their constitutional forms. 
It is not believed that public senti- 
ment will favor the expense of a spec- 
ial election to pass any of these harm- 
less proposals, and to kill the vicious 
ones. An educational movement is 
now on, headed by the Citizens' 
League of Indiana, to have them set 
aside, and the constitutional conven- 
tion question re-submitted. 

ROSS F. LOCKRIBGE 

Secretary 

Kansas 

At last after years of effort and 
organization in all the political par- 
ties of the State, the people of Kan- 
sas have set the seal of their author- 
ity upon one part of the scheme of 
popular government. On November 
3rd the voters ratified the amendment 
wrung from the legislature providing 
for the Recall of officers. The basis 
of the Recall is a 10 per cent, petition 
of voters on State officers, 15 per cent, 
for counties and 25 per cent, for 
cities. The vote on the Recall amend- 
ment was as follows: 240,240 for and 
135,630 against, majority 104,610. 

One other measure, authorizing the 
classification of property to equalize 
taxation, was rejected by the vote of 
166,800 to 156,969. 

Louisiana 

The Recall of elective officers has 
made its appeal to the common sense 
of the people of Louisiana in advance 
of the other tools of democracy, the 
Initiative and Referendum, just as it 
has in Kansas. A Recall amendment 
was submitted to the voters of this 
gulf state on November 3rd along 
with 16 others and was adopted by the 
vote of 23,208 to 7,650. The basis 
for invoking the Recall is 25 per cent, 
and this applies to state, county and 
city officials. But judges are excepted 
from the operation of this law. 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



47 



Fourteen other amendments were 
ratified at this election but all of 
them were either technical in charac- 
ter or local in bearing and do not 
concern us. 

Massachusetts 

Despite the considerable return of 
the Bay State Bull Moosers to the Re- 
publican standard on November 3rd, 
and the retirement of some of the 
more progressive Democrats from the 
legislature, the prospect of the peo- 
ple's taking charge of their own 
state government by means of direct 
powers is still bright. For, besides 
the fact that Governor Walsh, Demo- 
crat, an earnest and uncompromising 
advocate of the I. R. and R. and oth- 
er progressive measures, was re- 
elected by 12,000 plurality over Sam- 
uel W. McCall, Republican, there was 
a test vote on the Initiative and Ref- 
erendum in four districts in which the 
affirmative side won, overwhelmingly. 
This is an indication that the voters 
want these direct powers in reserve, 
for use upon occasion. 

Thus nine Republican members of 
the next Massachusetts House must 
go pledged to vote for the Initiative 
and Referendum amendment, at least 
two of whom had taken a prominent 



part in opposing that amendment in 
the previous session. 

How this test vote came about was 
explained in the October Equity 
(page 179). But for the benefit of 
new readers we will explain that in 
1913 the State legislature passed a 
law providing for "submitting to the 
voters on official ballots questions of 
public policy." To secure this sub- 
mission of any question in a repre- 
sentative district, it was required 
that a petition be signed by at least 
200 voters and by 1200 voters in a 
senatorial district. Four representa- 
tive districts, in this manner, had on 
the official ballots on November 3rd, 
the following question: 

"Shall the representative from this 
district be instructed to support the 
initiative and referendum, so as to 
give the voters the power to accept or 
reject at the polls measures that have 
been proposed by petition?" 

Thus it was that a referendum on 
the Referendum was held in these 
four districts. The vote averaged 3 
to 1 in the affirmative. If the new 
legislature were to stand on this ques- 
tion as did the last, save for these 
nine changed Republican votes, there 
would be the necessary two-thirds 
majority, so near was the vote on the 
amendment last winter. (See July 



Summary of Nov. 3, 1914, Votings on Measures 



Massachusetts 


Origin 


Yes 


No 


Majority 
For 


Majority 
Against 


Percent. 
Total 
Vote 


Highest Total Vote for Candi- 
dates, 458,204 
1. An Act to Make Saturday a 
Half Holiday for Laborers 
Employed by that State .... 


Leg. Amend. 
Leg. Amend. 
Leg. Amend. 


248,987 
253,716 


128,251 
86,834 


120,736 
166,882 




&2 


2. To Abolish the Enrollment 
of Members of Political 
Parties 




72 


3. Relative to Vacations of two 
weeks with pay for laborers 
employed by cities or towns . 
[Submitted to voters of 
different cities for accept- 
ance or rejection] Boston, 
Worcest er and a majority of 
places adopted the plan. 
Against it were New Bedford, 
Fall River and others. 







48 



Equity 



Equity, page 136). But this is 
hardly expected, in view of the gen- 
eral reaction at this election. Many 
of the men who voted for the amend- 
ment, last session, have not been re- 
turned. 

But if the voters of this state 
haven't yet got the direct powers of 
government, they did have a referen- 
dum, November 3rd, on three meas- 
ures submitted by the legislature, and 
all three were ratified by good ma- 
jorities. (See table). 

It should be noted that the Re- 
publican vote for Lieutenant Gover- 
nor ran ahead of the vote for Walsh. 

Another interesting result of this 
election was the vote of Attleboro 
and Revere for city charters having 
modified I. and R. features. West- 
field rejected such a charter. 

The city of Boston rejected the pro- 
posed return to a larger council elect- 
ed by wards by a vote of 47,191 to 
26,231. 

Minnesota 

Now let us drop a tear for the, in 
many ways, admirable and progressive 
state of Minnesota. A pretty good I. 
and R. amendment was submitted, 
and it received a vote of 168,004 for 
the amendment to only 41,577 against. 
But with this handsome favorable 
vote the amendment was lost! Why? 
The highest vote for the candidates 
for any office was 356,906; and the 
168,004 votes for the I. and R. amend- 
ment is less than a majority of the 
total vote for candidates. Hence, ac- 
cording to the unfortunate require- 
ment of the Minnesota constitution 
that an amendment must receive "a 
majority of those voting at the elec- 
tion" in order to carry, this amend- 
ment, which received such a handsome 
majority of the votes cast there-on 
(more than four to one), goes down 
as defeated because there were so 
many who voted for candidates who 



were too ignorant or indifferent to 
vote either way on this amendment 
and according to the requirements of 
the constitution all these were count- 
ed against the amendment, thus de- 
feating it. 

Some other states have this unfor- 
tunate constitutional requirement, and 
in these states it is almost impossible 
to amend the constitution. Was this 
provision put in these constitutions 
ignorantly and innocently? We hope 
so. In these states the first thing to 
do is to make a herculean effort and 
pass an amendment providing that 
future amendments will be decided by 
the vote there-on. After that, the 
constitution can be amended by the 
intelligent vote cast on amendments 
that are submitted, and cannot be de- 
feated by the ignorant voters who 
vote for candidates but who are too 
indifferent to vote either way on con- 
stitutional amendments. 

In Minnesota, eleven amendments 
were voted on at this election, and all 
received large affirmative majorities, 
but all but one were lost, for the rea- 
son above stated. Another of the 
lost amendments provided for a pos- 
sible Recall of public officials. The 
vote on this was 139,801 for to 44,961 
against; but the amendment was lost, 
for the reason above stated. The one 
successful amendment authorizes the 
use of certain state lands for state 
forests. The vote on this was 178,- 
954 for to 44,033 against. 

Michigan 

Only one of the four proposed 
amendments to the Michigan consti- 
tution which were submitted to the 
voters at this election obtained the 
requisite majority of those noting on 
the proposition, and was adopted. 
That was the amendment relative to 
the right of students while in atten- 
dance at any institution of learning, 
members of the legislature while in 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



49 



attendance at any session of the legis- 
lature being empowered to provide 
the manner in which, and the time 
and place at which, such absent voters 
may vote and for the canvass and re- 
turn of their votes. 

The three defeated measures had to 
do with bond issues for road work, 
the drainage of farm lands and the 
proposed application of the Initiative 
and Referendum principles to the reg- 



ulation of fraternal beneficial soci- 
eties (for details concerning this last 
measure, see page 180 of the October 
Equity). The vote on all four of 
these measures was very substantial, 
as will be seen by reference to the 
table herewith. 

Governor Ferris, a staunch friend 
of popular control of government, was 
re-elected by a majority of 35,809. 



Summary of Nov. 3, 1914, Votings on Measures 



Michigan 



Origin 



1. Issuing bonds for road work 

2. Issuing bonds for the drain- 
age of farm lands 

3. Relative to the right of stu 
dents and others away from 
home to vote 

4. Proposed application of the 

I. and R. to fraternal bene- 
ficial societies 



Leg. Amend 
Leg. Amend 

Leg. Amend 

Init. Amend 



Yes 



No 



Majority 
For 



Majority 
Against 



Total 
Vote 



164,333 
165,290 

190,510 

92,392 



202,087 
199,873 

175,948 

291, 776 



14,562 



37,754 
34,583 



199,384 






Total vote on measures varied from 384,168, 
82 per cent, of the candidate vote. 

Mississippi 

The official returns as to the nine 
measures submitted by the Legisla- 
ture of Mississippi are not available 
at the time we go to press, but we 
are informed on good unofficial au- 
thority that the Initiative and Refer- 
endum amendment, which was most 
satisfactory in form, failed of the 
necessary "majority of all the votes 
at the election' and was lost, although 
it had a majority of those voting 
thereon. 

Missouri 

Whatever else the voters of Mis- 
souri may want or not want, as signi- 
fied by the way they disposed of the 
fifteen propositions put up to them at 
the recent election, one thing above 
all others is clear to any one in search 
of the truth. That is that the voters 
of Missouri do not want to give up 
their lately acquired powers of direct 
control of government. Some super- 
ficial commentators, seeking to dis- 



or 87 per cent of the candidate vote, to 365,163, or 

credit the Initiative and Referendum, 
have tried to make it appear that the 
sweeping ''no" vote with which every 
one of the fifteen propositions was de- 
feated showed that the voters were 
getting tired of the I. and R. system. 
Additional color is given to these 
foolish misrepresentations by calling 
special attention to the defeat of the 
full-crew law, which was referred by 
initiative petition on motion of the 
railroads. This, they said, showed 
how conservative the voters of the 
state had become. 

But, strange to relate, these com- 
mentators generally fail to notice or 
to mention, if they take the trouble 
to inform themselves, that the first 
proposition on this identical Nov. 3 
ballot, known to all in Missouri as 
the "Anti-Single Tax" measure, was 
aimed straight at the heart of the 
I. and R. amendment to the constitu- 
tion. Under the guise of barring tax- 
ation measures from being initiated 



50 



Equity 



in future, such new conditions for the 
operation of the I. and R. amendment 
were proposed as would have made 
that amendment a dead letter to all 
intents and purposes. (See pages 
182 and 183 of the October Equity 
for details). This was scarcely de- 
nied by the proponents, who were 
known to be enemies of direct gov- 
ernment, and it was heralded over the 
entire state by the friends of the I. 
and R. as the supreme danger. 

The absurdity of the pretense that 
there was any need of specially ex- 
cluding the Single Tax was made ap- 
parent by merely reminding the pub- 
lic how the Single Tax proposition 



had been submitted to the voters in 
1912 and had been smothered under 
an adverse majority of over 400,000 
votes. 

Now in the light of these facts the 
meaning of the tremendous majority 
of 195,271 votes against the so-called 
Anti-Single Tax proposition on Nov. 
3rd, becomes apparent enough for any 
seeker for truth. It is important for 
all friends of the I. and R. to bear 
this result in mind when enemies cite 
the general reaction of 1914 and the 
negative voting in I. and R. states as 
a sign that the people of those states 
are ready to go back to the old 
system of party-boss rule, unchecked 



Summary of Nov. 3, 1914, Votings on Measures 



Missouri 



Origin 



Yes 


No 


138,039 


334,310 


123,596 


312,651 


112,497 


346,995 


89,629 


355,326 


117,197 


316,959 


117,041 


333,576 


214,951 


255,717 


140,475 


290,562 


159,892 


324,384 


172,909 


311,285 


134,449 


303,757 


131,382 
182,257 


306,942 
322,463 


76,574 


378,530 


80,935 


373,302 



Majority 
For 



Majority 
Against 



Percent. 
Total 
Vote 



Highest Total Vote for Candi- 
dates, 618,199 

1. To amend I. and R. law so 

as to restrict the submission 
of single-tax or other tax- 
ation measures and make 
other changes 

2. To increase Kansas City 
debt limit 

3. For 10 cents a $100 tax for 
road work 

4. To change basis of payment 
for members of legislature 
from per diem to $1,000 an- 
nual salary 

5. To increase debt limit for cities 
of over 100,000 population 

6. To authorize voters of a dis- 
trict to increase the road tax 
by majority vote 

7. To authorize the pensioning 
of the blind 

8. To authorize easier amend- 
ment of charters of 
certain cities 

9. Requiring railroads to em- 
ploy full crews of trainmen 

10. Making counties the sole 
units in local option elections 

11. Abolishing office of excise 
commissioners in cities of 
300,000 population and hav 
ing a bi-partisan board ap- 
pointed 

12. Abolishing office of police 
commissioners in cities of 
300,000 population and hav- 
ing bi-partisan board ap- 
pointed 

13. Woman Suffrage 

14. A $50,000,000 highways 

bond issue 

15. To lay taxes or issue bonds 

for road building 



Leg . Amend 
Leg . Amend 
Leg . Amend 

Leg . Amend 
Leg . Amend 

Leg. Amend 
Leg . Amend 

Leg. Amend 
Ref. Stat. 
Ref. Stat. 

Ref. Stat. 



Ref. Stat. 
Init. Amend 



Init. Amend 
nit. Amend 



196,271 


76 


189,055 


70 


234,498 


74 


265,697 


71 


199,762 


70 


216,535 


72 


40,766 


76 


150,087 


69 


164,492 


78 


138,376 


78 



169,308 



175,560 
140,206 

301,956 

292,367 



70 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



51 



by the power of the voters to directly 
control public affairs. From Dr. Wm. 
P. Hill, one of the men who took a 
leading part in the successful fight 
against the so-called Anti-Single Tax 
amendment (really an Anti-I. and R. 
amendment), we received the follow- 
ing letter: 

St. Louis, Mo., Nov. 19, 1914. 
Editor Equity: 

Inclosed please find official report of 
the vote on Anti-Single Tax Amend- 
ment No. I. The Secretary of State 
went out of his way to mark it in 
black faced type on the ballot as "Anti- 
Sing-le Tax." You will notice that we 
defeated it by tremendous majorities 
in nearly every county in the state. 
In fact, we carried all but about six in 
the whole state. This shows that the 
I. and R. are well grounded now in 
Missouri and cannot be shaken. 
Yours truly, 

Wm. P. Hill 

Elsewhere in this issue we have 
discussed editorially the defeat of the 
full-crew bill, which caused such a 
great amount of comment, especially 
among the conservative newspapers. 
The majority against this referred 
measure was large (164,492), but con- 
siderably less than that against the 
attack on the I. and R. A glance at 
the vote by counties shows that this 
full-crew law was beaten largely by 
the rural vote. 

The proposal for pensioning the 
blind came nearest to adoption, its 
adverse majority being only 40,766. 
Woman Suffrage, which carried thir- 
teen counties and tied several others, 



lost in the state by 140,206. The 
County Unit amendment, under which 
the question of local option would be 
determined by counties alone and pre- 
venting cities from voting separately 
thereon, fell in the general onslaught 
of negatives, by 138,376. 

Attention should be drawn here to 
the fact that only three of the fifteen 
propositions on the Missouri ballot 
were there by initiative petition of the 
voters. These were Woman Suffrage, 
bond issue for road building and the 
levying of special taxes for road con- 
struction. Four of the fifteen were 
laws passed by the legislature and 
submitted by Referendum petition, 
namely, the full-crew, county unit, 
substitution of excise board for cities 
in place of excise commissioner and 
the provision for a bi-partisan police 
commission for cities instead of the 
commissioner named by the governor. 

Montana 

Suffrage was the dominant question 
before the voters of Montana, along 
with five other matters on the bal- 
lots, November 3rd. A majority of 
those voting on suffrage was recorded 
for the proposition and Montana join- 
ed the group of States recognizing 
the citizenship of women. Another 
measure, which was adopted, provides 
for the investment of State funds on 
farm land security at a low rate. 
(See table of votings). 



Summary of Nov. 3, 1914, Votings on Measures 



Montana 


Origin 


Yes 


No 


Majority 
For 


Majority 
Against 


Per cent. 
Total 
Vote 


1. Establishing a commission to 
regulate boxing contests . . . 


Ref. Stat. 

Init. Stat. 

Init. Stat. 

Init. Stat. 
Leg. Amend. 

Leg. Amend. 


34,440 

36,991 

45,162 

30,465 
41,302 

28,703 


42,581 
44,275 
27,780 

46,311 

37,588 

46,265 




8,141 
7,284 


«J • 01 u 


2. Compensation for industrial 
accidents 




j*££o > 


3. To loan state funds on farm 
land security 


17,382 


o _ S5 2 

** «r _, o «j 

gtf £-3 

xi-n <y 5 a 


4. Consolidation of educational 
institutions 


15,846 


5. Woman suffrage 


3,714 


.Sf^o^g 


6. Temporary increase in 

rate of taxation 


17,562 









52 



Equity 



Nebraska 

The interesting thing about the I. 
and R. results in Nebraska is that the 
requirement in the I. and R. amend- 
ment that "the votes cast in favor of 
said initiative measure or part of said 
constitution shall constitute 35 per 
cent, of the total vote cast at said 
election" in order to carry has not de- 
feated any of the constitutional 
amendments voted on in this election, 
as the accompanying table shows. 
This restriction was made by the 
liquor interests, but they have not 
been benefitted thereby. No prohibi- 
tion amendment was proposed, but 
the liquor interests oppose woman 
suffrage; and that amendment failed 
for want of a majority and not for 
want of a favorable vote of 35 per 
cent. Suffrage and prohibition al- 
ways call out a larger vote, so the 
requirement of 35 per cent, favorable 
vote on these questions is not really 
important. But this requirement is 
likely to endanger amendments that 



attract less popular attention. Thus 
the liquor men did not help their own 
cause, and weakened the Initiative 
and the process of amendment. 

However, an inspection of the table 
will show that this restriction did no 
harm in this election, as every amend- 
ment which had a majority of the 
votes cast thereon also had an affirm- 
ative vote of more than 35 per cent, 
of all the votes cast, which means, of 
course, the highest vote cast for any 
candidate, as the vote for candidate is 
always higher than that cast on meas- 
ures. The total vote for governor 
was 246,941; and the lowest affirma- 
tive vote for a constitutional amend- 
ment which had a majority vote cast 
thereon was 88,268, which is slightly 
more than the required 35 per cent, 
favorable vote. But we fear future 
obstruction to desirable measures by 
this injurious restriction in this state, 
and we hope that other states will 
avoid it. The anti-prohibition and 
anti-suffrage forces need not insist 
upon it, for it does them no good. 



Nebraska 


Origin 


Yes 


. T 1 Majority j Majority j Per cent. 
rso 1 For | Against 1 Total 
1 Vote 


1. University removal 

2. Employers' liability 

3. Nebraska City armory 


Ref. Stat. 

Ref. Stat. 

Ref. Stat. 

Init. Amend. 

Leg. Amend. 
Leg. Amend. 
Leg. Amend. 


66,883 
92,513 


148,110 

85.777 




81,227 «co 


6,736 




o°~ 


40,520 133.457 




92,937 


•££<> 


90,738 

88,068 

102,891 

89,385 


100,842 

82,136 
63,596 
76,013 




10,104 


-"-"to" £ ° 


5. Eliminating the rule of uni- 
formity in taxation 


5,932 
39,295 
13,372 




§~* 3 «3 






«xg a 






= ^E§ 



North Dakota 

Inspection of the accompanying 
table will show a comforting relief 
from the extensive negative voting 
this year in nearly all the other states. 
Here we have large affirmative ma- 
jorities on all the measures submitted 
except one — the woman suffrage 
amendment was lost, but with not a 
very heavy negative majority. The 
I. and R. amendments for statutory 
I. and R. and for constitutional Ini- 
tiative were handsomely carried, end- 
ing victoriously a ten years effort on 



the part of the I. and R. workers. 
But the amendments are not ideal. 
Their chief features are: 

Statutory Initiative: 10 per cent, 
required, in a majority of the coun- 
ties. Measure goes to legislature, 
and if not enacted, goes to people. 
Referendum: Same requirements, "or 
by the legislative assembly, if a ma- 
jority of the members elect vote 
therefor." There is a pretty good 
emergency feature. 

Constitutional Initiative: 25 per 
cent, required in "not less than half 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



53 



the counties." The requirements are 
too difficult, particularly for the con- 
stitutional Initiative, made so by fear 
on the part of the prohibition senti- 
ment in the state. * * However, 
these two amendments, particularly 
the former, is a good start for popu- 
lar control of public affairs in North 
Dakota. 

North Carolina 
Only one or two of the ten amend- 
ments submitted by the legislature of 
North Carolina were of any general 
significance and all were rejected by 
small majorities. The one proposing 
to substitute the phrase "War be- 
tween the States" for the words "In- 
surrection or rebellion against the 
United States," in the State constitu- 
tion, was beaten by the vote of 61,031 
to 57,816. The proposal to increase 
the pay of the State legislators failed 
by the vote of 68,149 to 50,722. 

Nevada 

The other state in which the suf- 
fragists won their point was Nevada, 
where the suffrage amendment was 
adopted by the vote of 10,936 to 7,257. 
The only other matter voted on in this 
state was the elimination of a class 
of the constitution requiring state of- 
ficials to swear that they had never 
taken part in a duel, which was ap- 
proved by the vote of 10,161 to 3,670. 

Ohio 

Through the instrumentality of their 
recently acquired "tools of demo- 
cracy," the Initiative and Referen- 



dum, the voters of Ohio have resolved 
the State's policy on two great, burn- 
ing issues, namely, suffrage and pro- 
hibition. Whether the defeat of both 
propositions is to be credited to the 
wave of reaction felt in other states 
or not, the great fact is that the will 
of the electorate has been found and 
recorded. Nor has there been, so far 
as we know, any question as to the 
legality of the several petitions or as 
to the final authority of the officially 
declared results. This would indicate 
that the law passed last winter to 
safeguard the process of self govern- 
ment had served its purpose, for the 
petition scandals of the preceding 
year were not repeated. 

It was the brewing interests that 
first took advantage of the I. and R., 
early in the year, to initiate a "Home 
Rule" measure. When the Prohibi- 
tionists found that its effect was to re- 
peal the existing county option law 
and to prevent restrictive legislation, 
they initiated a state-wide prohibition 
amendment. The enormous vote cast, 
97 per cent, of the highest total for 
candidates, attests the extraordinary 
interest aroused over the liquor ques- 
tion. (See table of votings). 
Oklahoma 

Were it not for the requirement in 
the constitution of Oklahoma that 
amendments must receive a majority 
of all the votes cast at an election, 
that young state would now be enter- 
ing on the novel experiment of a one- 
body legislature of 80 members em- 



Summary 


of Nov. 3, 1914, Votings on 


Measures 






Ohio 


Origin 


Yes 


No 


Majority | Majority | Per cent 
For I Against 1 Total ' 
1 Vote 


1. Home rule on the subject of 
intoxicating liquors 


Init. Amend. 
Init. Amend. 
Init. Amend. 
Init. Amend. 


554,548 
224,598 
316,160 
503,292 


546,248 
551,977 
517,611 
586,663 


8,300 




State- 


2. Limitation of tax rate 


327,379 

201,451 

83,371 


3. Woman suffrage 




below 


4. State-wide prohibition 





The highest total vote, 1,129,233. Total vote on measures varied from 68 to 97 per cent of ran 
didate vote. d,u " 



54 



Equity 



powered to choose therefrom a com- 
mission of 15 members. These two 
new bodies with the lieutenant gover- 
nors, would take over the powers now 
held by the present senate and house. 
It is the fact that such a proposi- 
tion, placed on the ballot by Initiative 
petition, received a large majority of 
the votes thereon, but not a majority 
of all the election. The vote was 
94,636 for and 71,742 against. Irre- 



spective of the merits of this propos- 
ed experiment in state government, 
the progressive state of Oklahoma 
owes it to itself to remove this absurd 
and outworn obstacle to the express- 
ion of the popular will. People who don't 
know enough to vote on a question or 
are not enough interested to do so are 
not entitled to be counted as against 
those who are for it. The table shows 
the result on other measures submitted. 



Summary 


of Nov. 3,? 


1914, Vc 


rtings on 


Measures 






Oklahoma 


Origin 


Yes 


No 


Majority 
For 


Majority 
Against 


Percent. 
Total 
Vote 


1. Reducing the number of 
courts from two to one, sty- 


Init Amend. 

Init Amend. 

InitA mend. 
Init Amend. 


105,529 

117,675 

107,342 
94,636 


64,782 

57,120 

62,380 

71,742 


40,747 

60,555 

44,962 
22,894 






2. Reducing the maximum 
state t ax from three and one- 
half to two and one-half and 
prohibiting legislature from 
spending more than that . . . 

3. Laying a 2 per cent, tax on 
the production of mines, gas 










4. Creating a one body 

legislature 







Oregon 

Official pamphlet of 99 pages, giv- 
ing details concerning 29 measures. 
Cannot the average voter read this 
book in four months better than the 
average legislator can read and con- 
sider ten or twelve proposed laws per 
day right straight along during a 
session of from 60 to 100 or more 
days? Ten of the 29 measures were 
referred to the voters by the legisla- 
ture, the remaining 19 having been 
initiated by the voters. By referring 
to the accompanying table the reader 
will see that 5 of the 29 were carried. 
The reader will also see that the vot- 
ing was discriminating, the majorities 
either way varying greatly. The fol- 
lowing communication from Mr. Alfred 
D. Cridge, who has had much exper- 
ience in I. and R. activities in Oregon, 
throws interesting lights on the Ore- 
gon situation: 

Lessons of the Election 

The people of Oregon for the sixth 
time have acted as a legislature and 



have done what they wanted to do. 
They have again demonstrated that 
they are not radical, and hardly to be 
called a progressive people. 

The legislature in 1913 submitted 11 
measures to be voted on in 1914, the 
people having 18 months in which to 
consider them. None of them can be 
called fundamental, and none of them 
in any way attacked special privilege. 
Two tax measures submitted can be 
called progressive, but they are poorly 
drawn. The people voted by an enor- 
mous majority to make qualifications 
for citizenship in the state the same as 
for being a citizen of the United States, 
thus abolishing the voting of foreign 
born residents who have merely taken 
out first papers, (159,000 to 39,000 ap- 
proximately) 

They voted for a measure to allow 
cities to consolidate by a majority of 
20,000. Prejudice against the growing 
city of Portland, which has about 40 
per cent of the population of the State, 
making the majority much smaller than 
it was expected to be. 

Because of this prejudice a measure 
solely affecting Portland, allowing it to 
combine its county and city govern- 
ments into one, and supposed to be 
unopposed by any considerable body 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



55 



anywhere in the state, was defeated by 
nearly 24,000 majority. 

The other nine measures were decis- 
ively defeated by majorities ranging 
from 93,000 to 12,000, including two 
measures re-establishinlg two normal 
schools in different parts of the state 
in addition to the one normal now es- 
tablished in the central part of the 
State. 

The strictly initiative measures were 
18, and of these the people have cer- 
tainly defeated 16 of them. The mea- 
sure that emphatically carried is pro- 
hibition, its majority being over 37,000. 

The tax reform measures were all 
snowed under, those submitted by the 
initiative as well as those submitted 
by the legislature. 

The lessons from the election in 
Oregon are that there is little use in 
placing a measure on the ballot 
without a strong, systematic and 
widespread campaign long before the 
measure is submitted, and continuing 
after that up to election day. Espec- 
ially is this So with measures that 
attack any vested interests or valuable 
special privileges. Of course if the 
Initiative is to be regarded as merely 
an educational vehicle and a page in 
the state pamphlet going to every voter 
as a cheap form of propaganda, then 
these sacrifices are not in vain. The 
Socialists with their "right to work" 
bill, altho defeated by a majority of 
66,000, received an affirmative vote for 
it of 57,000, a vote far larger than pos- 
sible for a Socialist candidate. 

The tax reformers of the radical 
schools of thought with a sur-tax mea- 
sure obtained an affirmative vote of 
58,000 and made no campaign whatever 
for It after filing, not even putting in 
a page in the State pamphlet, which 
could have been done for a cost of $35. 

There are certainly 20 per cent of the 
voters who voted "No" on nearly every- 
thing without thinking a minute, but 
with a blind prejudice against 
the Initiative. They are the capital 
stock of special privilege, just as are 
the "vote her straight" party voters. 
The plute papers, and that is nearly 
all in the State, reiterated the cry, 
"When in doubt, vote NO," and pro- 
ceeded to create as many doubts as pos- 
sible in the honest minds. This ele- 
ment in the community also encour- 
aged the idea of voting NO on every- 
thing. Quite a number of intelligent 



men and women seemed to think this 
was an evidence of great wisdom. 
However, even these very people would 
exempt one and two measures from 
their sweep. 

The vote on prohibition shows the 
largest, nearly 232,000. The campaign 
for this was most thorough and wide- 
spread, with plenty of money to make 
it with. While repeatedly defeated in 
the past, one campaign ending was just 
the sign that another had started. 
They kept after ONE thing, and have 
won out. Nor will they go to sleep, 
now they have won. The rooting of 
the "blind pig" will keep them awake. 

The advocates of such fundamental 
reforms as single-tax, proportional 
representation and simplification of 
government, must learn to regard an 
election as merely a mark in the road 
and not its terminal. They will have 
to bear in mind that the Initiative is 
an educational institution and cannot 
give brains to people. It can only be 
effective when the people who think 
are taught to think straight, and kept 
thinking straight by personal contact, 
organization and co-operation. 

Too much has been expected of Ore- 
gon in the past. Its people outside of 
Portland are scattered, largely de- 
scended from pioneers who were iso- 
lated from the world for many years, 
and who did not come from the pro- 
gessive and radical minded sections of 
the country. They are easily fright- 
ened, somewhat apprehensive of being 
jobbed and will not reason rapidly. 
There is not much new blood among 
the people of Oregon as in the other 
Pacific Coast states, nor has material 
development been as rapid as in Cali- 
fornia or Washington. The people are 
overwhelmingly Republican, most of 
the voters going down the line and 
marking every candidate nominated as 
a Republican. This is seen in Portland 
where a man who was discovered to be 
utterly impossible secured the nomi- 
nation to the legislature through hav- 
ing the same sir-name as a very popular 
candidate for another office. Notwith- 
standing the greatest effort was made 
to get the voters to vote for his Demo- 
cratic opponent, the county central 
committe of the Republican party urg- 
ing every citizen to vote for the Demo- 
crat, and the newspapers giving the 
facts publicity, the Republican has been 
elected by 2,000. He will probably not 



56 



Equity 

Summary of Nov. 3, 1914, Votings on Measures 



Oregon 


Origin 


Yes 


No 


Majority 
For 


Majority 
Against 


Per cent. 
Total 
Vote 


1. Requiring voters to be citizens 


Leg . Amend. 

Leg. Amend. 

Leg. Amend. 
Leg. Amend. 
Leg. Amend. 

Leg. Amend. 

Leg. Stat. 
Leg. Amend. 

Leg. Stat. 
Leg. Amend. 
Init. Amend. 

Init. Stat. 

Init. Stat. 
Init. Amend. 

Init. Stat. 
Init. Amend. 
Init. Amend. 
Init. Amend. 
Init. Amend. 

Init. Amend. 

Init. Stat. 
Init. Amend. 

Init. Stat. 

Init. Stat. 
Init. Amend. 
Init. Amend. 

Init. Amend. 

Init. Amend. 

Init. Amend. 


164,879 

52,040 

77,392 
49,759 
59,206 

52,362 
84,041 
96,116 
87,450 
41,087 
49,360 
88,489 

74,323 
65,495 

67,128 

67,110 

136,842 

100,552 

59,186 

55,469 
92,722 
82,841 
34,436 
32,701 
39,740 
62,376 

57,859 

25,057 

43,289 


39,847 

143,804 

103,194 
135,550 
116,490 

122,704 
109,643 
77,671 
105,345 
105,345 
167,883 
120,296 

107,263 
136,193 

104,564 
111,113 
100,362 
100,395 
124,943 

120,154 
110,404 
107,039 
143,468 
143,366 
137,116 
123,429 

126,201 

153.638 

140,507 


125,032 






2. Creating office of lieutenant 


91,764 

25,802 
85,791 
57,284 

70,342 
25,602 




3. City and county consol- 




3 


4. Road bonds authorization . . . 




05 


5. Equal and Uniform taxes. . . . 




a 


6. Changing rules of taxation 
as to uniformity 




G 


7. Normal school at Ashland . . . 






8. Merger of cities 


18,445 


o Si 


9. Normal school at Weston. . . . 




17,895 

17,895 

118,528 

31,807 


>t 


10. Fixing pay of legislators 




> 


11. Universal 8-hour work day . . 




rt 4> 


12. 8-hour day for women workers 




O n> 


13. Prohibiting party nomina- 
ations for judiciary 




32,940 
70,698 

47,436 
44,003 


14. $1500 tax exemption 




N g 


15. Public docks and water front- 




oo" O 









17. State- wide prohibition 


36,480 
167 


* 8 


18. Abolishing death penalty. . . . 




<u ° 


19. Personal graduated extra tax 

20. Consolidating corporation and 


65,757 

64,685 
17,682 
24,198 
109,032 
110,665 
97,376 
61,053 

68,342 

128,580 


> a 

rt ©, 






O O 






*J -u» 






*j o 






JS o 










•« £ 


27. For department to give 
work to unemployed 

28. Primary election of 




2 •« 

> 




29. Equal assessment and $300 ex- 
emption 




97,218 





dare to take his seat, and at last ac- 
counts was 2,000 miles away, and still 
going. 

A retroactive governor, known to be 
associated with all the enemies of pop- 
ular government, has been elected by 
a large majority. A retroactive legis- 
lature is in power with only five or 
six other than Republican members, 
and only two in the lower house. The 
fact that a Democrat was re-elected 
United States Senator is one of the 
political circumstances that few stop 
to analyze. Senator Chamberlain when 
governor at the beginning of the life 
of the Initiative and Referendum iden- 
tified himself with their preservation. 
Otherwise the Republican legislature 
would have strangled the Referendum 
with the "emergency clause" and ham- 
strung the Initiative with regulations 
making it impossible to operate. He 
stood like a stone wall against this con- 
spiracy. When equal suffrage for wom- 
en was unpopular he declared for it, 
even when it had been defeated by 
22,000. He identified himself with State- 
ment Number One, by which members 



of the legislature were pledged to elect 
the choice of the people. Maybe he 
did these things with the motives of 
the politician and for self advancement; 
but he was wise enough to do so when 
other politicians were not. The Demo- 
cratic party in this state can some- 
times elect a man who is thus identi- 
fied with democratic principles by con- 
centrating efforts and attention on him, 
and by "throwing the rest of the ticket 
to the wolves." In the case of Senator 
Chamberlain, he had this time an op- 
ponent identified with the timber trust 
and who had been scathingly denounced 
by the United States court. His op- 
ponent had been picked out by big 
business as just the man wanted, but 
his political enemies had the "goods" 
on him, and when the governor of the 
state read off the indictments and the 
court records made before the thought 
of political honors had been brought 
up, in a public debate, Senator Cham- 
berlain's political stock went booming. 
The Democratic candidate for governor 
had no platform and undertook to out- 
dodge and out-evade issues of all kinds 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



57 



with his opponent. The Republican 
candidate was a man of conservative 
type with an ability to keep his mouth 
shut, or to say nothing of moment when 
open, and the normal majority did the 
rest. To be elected governor on the 
Democratic ticket in Oregon means 
that the man must have some vital 
planks in his platform and get out for 
them. A Democratic party in an over- 
whelming Republican state must have 
democratic principles on living issues 
in order to get very far. As a party 
in Oregon the Democrats are retro- 
active, sullenly opposed to pogress and 
inclined to be a little red wagon towed 
along by the Republican elephant. The 
men it has put over as governors have 
all been men who were outspoken and 
radical and who identified themselves 
with progress. 

There will be fewer measures on the 
ballot in 1916 than before unless the 
legislature submits more. The cost of 
securing the initiative signatures re- 
quired will be more, as instead of 
10,100 being the legal minimum there 
will be required probably 20,000 or 
more. This is" caused by women voting 
for the first time for supreme court 
justices, the voting for which is taken 
as a basis of estimate for the eight per 
cent required for measures. Not only 
will it be driven home to the under- 



standing that radical measures must 
be well campaigned for, but the cost 
will be much more to secure the sig- 
natures required; probably three times 
more, because the last half of the sig- 
natures are always more difficult to se- 
cure than the first half — and more 
costly. 

Then with a retroactive legislature 
and a standpat governor, both intent 
on doing any "devilment" they think 
they can get away with, there will al- 
most certainly be thrown around the 
initiative "protective" measures, nomi- 
nally enacted to preserve it, but ac- 
tually to increase the difficulty and cost 
of submission. One of the "friends" 
of the initiative who loudly endorsed 
the protection of the people at a club 
dinner recently, was quietly egged, on 
by ITRen to avow that if he could he 
would provide that all wanting to sign 
an initiative petition should "walk to 
the courthouse on their hands." He 
wants to provide that only at the time 
of registering and at the courthouse 
in the presence of the county clerk 
should a citizen be allowed to sign an 
initiative petition. 

I look for less than half a dozen Ini- 
tiative measures to be submitted next 
time, even if the operation of the Ini- 
tiative is unmolested. Of course, the 
legislature may overdo it again. 

Alfred D. C ridge. 



Summary of Nov. 3, 1914, Votings on Measures 



South Dakota 


Origin 


Yes 


No 


Majority | 
For 


Majority | 
Against 


Per cent. 
Total 
Vote 


1. Woman suffrage 


Leg. Amend. 
Leg. Amend. 
Leg. Amend. 

Leg. Amend. 

Leg. Amend. 
Leg. Amend. 

Leg . Amend. 

Leg . Amend. 

Init. Stat. 
Init. Stat. 

Ref. Stat. B 
Joint resolu- 
tion 


39,605 
45,554 
32,092 

28,226 

29,601 
29,746 

36,317 

32,958 
38,000 
37,106 

27,538 
34,832 


51,519 
35,102 
45.733 

43,162 

44,107 
45,051 

36,543 

40,457 
51,779 
44,697 
49,382 
51,585 




11,914 




2. Relating to the sale of 

school lands 


10,452 


*>3 


3. Relating to the terms of 
county officers 


13,641 
14,936 

14,506 
15,305 

226 

7,499 
13,779 

7,591 
21,844 
16.753 


I* 


4. Requiring the legislature to 
apply the Initiative and 
Referendum to muncipalities 




0) 

_ o 
■*' U 

© v 
1/5 o. 


5. Creating a state board of 
control for all charitable and 
penal institutions and also 
a board of three for 
educational affairs 




6. For biennial elections of the 
legislature 




-O 

<u +■» 


7. Authorizing the legislature to 
select a substitute for 
judge of the supreme court 
in emergency 






8. To authorize counties or 
cities to own and operate 
irrigation works 




It 


9. Prohibition 




X! g 


10. Direct primary 




"2 «j 


11. An educational commission . . 




12. Constitutional convention... 




<u d 

"it 







58 



Equity 



South Dakota 
It was formerly believed, and it is 
still said by some, that the people 
will vote for anything put before 
them in an affirmative way; that it is 
easy to say . yes. If that were ever 
true, it certainly is not true now. 
Witness the accompanying table. And 
South Dakota does not stand alone 
in this respect. Witness other tables 
in this issue in which negative votes 
greatly predominate. Our only con- 
tention is that the voters have a right 
to vote "no" if they want to. The 
fact that they do use this privilege 
largely in a negative way is no reason 
why they should not have the privi- 



lege. We have no wish to say how 
voters should vote on measures, but 
we do contend that they should have a 
right to vote on any measures that 
they wish to vote on, and that they 
should vote for or against, as best 
suits their sovereign pleasure. 

We are very sorry that South Da- 
kota, the first state to have the I. 
and R. in its constitution, voted 
against a constitutional convention. 
We hoped that this state would also 
take the lead in drawing and adopting 
a thoroughly modern state constitu- 
tion. But like Indiana, it missed its 
opportunity. Now instead of being a 
leader, it will become a follower. 



South Carolina 



Vote for Governor- 



-Manning (Dem.) 
Britton (Soc.) . . 



,34,606 
83 

34,689 



Vote on Amendments 



No 



Empowering- cities of Sumpter and Darlington and 
towns of Beton and Walkalle to assess abutting 
property for permanent improvements 

Slightly changing the name of the State College for 
the deaf and blind 

Adding bonding proviso for Yorkville School District. 

Empowering cities of Florence and Orangeburg and 
town of Lansdowne to assess abutting property for 
permanent improvements 

Providing for vivavoce election of where 

only one candidate is nominated — (see Art. Ill sec. 
20) 

Relating to bonded debt of city of Florence 

Relating to bonded indebtedness for cities of Chester 
and Sumpter 

Empowering towns of Latta and Dillon to assess 
abutting property for permanent improvements.... 

Striking out the words "Blind, Deaf, Dumb" after 
"Insane" and before "and" — (Art. XII sec. 1) 

Empowering the town of Fort Mill to assess abutting 
property for permanent improvements 

Empowering cities of Anderson, Greenwood, and 
towns of Bennettville, Timonsville and Honea Path 
to assess abutting property for permanent improve- 
ments , 



2,089 



10,730 
5,324 



5,971 



5,373 



665 



4,283 

4,283 



4,296 



5,348 
5,455 


4,130 
3,563 


6,273 


3,725 


5,606 


3,879 


8,217 


3,600 


5,289 


3,742 



4,013 



South Carolina 

As a shining example of the kind 
of constitutional amendments that 
ought never to be proposed or adopt- 
ed, we submit the accompanying table 
of the eleven amendments actually 
ratified by the voters of South Caro- 



lina on November 3rd. Manifestly 
the subjects of these amendments be- 
long to the law-making power of 
local communities and should not take 
up the time of the State legislature, 
much less that of the entire elector- 
ate. 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



59 



Texas 

There is little, if any, weeping 
among the friends of popular govern- 
ment over the defeat of the Initiative 
and Referendum amendment offered 
by a privilege-controlled legislature 
to the people of the Lone Star State. 
Some of the I. and R. advocates are 
actually rejoicing. The amendment 
was so bad that its enactment could 
have benefitted the people little, even 
if the legislature had provided the 
necessary machinery of operation, 
which was entirely omitted. Besides, 
the percentage of voters for the invok- 
ing of both the Initiative and Refer- 
endum was placed at 20 per cent., 
which is absurdly high. 

However, the voters, having put 
this legislative abortion out of the 
way, may now turn their attention to 
the problem of how to obtain adequate 
control over the government which 
they entrust to elected officials and 
legislators. The table shows the vot- 
ings on this and two other measures. 

Washington 

"Vote 'No' on every proposition and 
the ticket straight" was the advice 
spread by both the old party spokes- 
men among the voters of Washington 
State, referring to the ten measures 
that finally won a place on the Nov. 3 
ballots. "Vote for Prohibition — no- 
thing else matters," said the anti- 
saloon party. The Employers' Asso- 



ciation urged all to vote "No" and the 
Whiskey Association wanted everyone 
to "vote against all measures, and 
the Republican ticket, straight." Pro- 
gressives, Socialists and the Labor 
Grange combination, under these cir- 
cumstances were able to make small 
headway. Interest centered chiefly 
on the prohibition and the universal 
8-hour measure. 

Two of the ten measures survived 
the tidal wave of negation. Prohibi- 
tion was one by a majority of 18,632. 
The other was the abolition of the 
labor employment agencies objected 
to by the Labor-Grange combine, by 
about 20,000 majority. The labor 
forces also had the satisfaction of 
electing one of their candidates to the 
Supreme Court. 

The large vote cast on all of the 
measures, an average of 87^ per 
cent, of the total for candidates, dis- 
poses of the absurd comment of many 
eastern papers that Washington is 
ready to drop the I. and R. The re- 
sult simply shows that the electorate 
of this state is far from being radical 
yet. But they are evidently disposed 
to use their power of control. 

One of the surprising political inci- 
dents of the election in this state was 
the disappearance of the Socialist 
party from the list entitled to go on 
the next ballot, owing to the increase 
in the total vote. 



Summary of Nov. 3, 1914, Votings on Measures 



Washington 


Origin 


Yes 


No 


Majority 
For 


Majority 
Against 


Per cent. 
Total 
Vote 


1. State-wide prohibition 


Init. Stat. 

Init. Stat. 

Init. Stat. 

Init. Stat. 

Init. Stat, 

Init. Stat. 
Init. Stat. 


189,840 

142,017 

117,882 

162,054 

143,738 

111,805 
118,881 


171,208 

147,298 

167,080 

144,544 

154,166 

183,726 
212,935 


18,632 






2. "Blue sky" provision against 


5,281 
49,198 

10,428 

71,921 
94,054 


t total vote, 
tal vote on 
ried from 64 
ent of can- 


3. Abolishing bureau of inspec- 
tion of public offices 

4. Abolition of employment 
agencies 


17,510 


5. Requiring employers to pro- 


highes 
874. Tc 
sure va 
7 per c 
ite vot< 


6. For the employ merit of con- 








.S^S 00 ^ 






H^S2^ 



60 



Equity 



Wisconsin 

Ten constitutional amendments 
reached the voters at this election 
after having passed two legislatures. 
At least some of them, and probably 
all, had been well considered and 
certainly should have been adopted. 
But they all went down to defeat, as 
the accompanying table shows. 

Why? That is the question. The 
reactionary papers are howling with 
delight at what they call a "repudia- 
tion of La Folletteism." They are 
particularly delighted with Wiscon- 
sin's defeat of the I. and R. amend- 
ment, the text of which was excellent, 
the University professors having aid- 
ed in its preparation. Here is the 
explanation as given in the November 
issue of La Follette's Magazine: 

So long- as the increased income de- 
rived from enforcing just taxation up- 
on the railroads and other public ser- 
vice corporations was sufficient to pay 
the expenses of administering state 
government and no state tax was nec- 
essary for general state purposes, 
Progressive Government was just fine 



and everybody was enthusiastically for 
it. 

And then along comes an ambitious 
legislature. It conceives the novel 
idea of laying out a building program 
for the University and the normal 
schools, so extensive in scope that it 
could not be completed in the next five 
years. It appropriates the entire sum 
necessary to complete the program and 
jams it into the 1914 tax. On top of 
this they go rioting in highway build- 
ing, increasing the annual appropria- 
tion for that purpose from $350,000 to 
$1,650,000. This adds another tidy 
little sum to the 1914 tax. And un- 
fortunately the man behind the gun in 
the executive office, who could have 
saved the day with a well directed veto 
— well, he just "WASN'T THERE" and 
the mischief was done. 

When there followed the levy of a 
state tax to aid in paying the expenses 
of state government, the taxpayers 
were incensed. It was with possibly 
a single exception, the first levy of the 
kind for such purpose in fourteen 
years of progressive Republican con- 
trol. And the people were rightfully 
indignant. It was wrong to impose 
this enormous burden upon them in a 
single levy. If made at all it should 
have been distributed over a period of 



Summary of Nov. 3, 1914, Votings on Measures 



Wisconsin 



Origin 



Yes 



No 



Majority 
For 



Majority 
Against 



Percent. 
Total 
Vote 



1. The Initiative and Refer- 
endum 

2. To increase pay of legislators 

3. Empowering increase of 
judicial circuits and number 
of judges 

4. Providing for state fire in- 
surance and state annuities . 

5. Providing for state insurance 
but not state annuities 

6. Home rule for cities and 
villages within the state 
constitution 

7. Empowering municipal cor- 
porations to condemn private 
property adjoining previous 
condemnations 

8. Providing that constitutional 
amendments may be voted 
upon by the voters after a 
three-fifths adoption by one 
legislature instead of two. . . . 

9. That an amendment approv- 

ed by a majority of the legis- 
lature may be submitted to 
the voters upon a 10 per 

cent, petition 

10. The Recall of all state officers 
except judges 



Leg 
Leg. 



Leg, 
Leg. 
Leg, 



Amend. 
Amend. 



Amend. 
Amend. 
Amend. 



Leg. Amend 



Leg. Amend 



Leg. Amend, 



Leg 
Leg. 



Amend, 
Amend. 



84,934 
68,907 

63,311 
59,908 
58,490 

86,020 
61,122 

71,734 

68,435 
81,628 



148,536 
157,202 



154,827 
170,338 
165,966 

141,472 
154,945 I, 



160,761 



150,215 
144,386 



63,602 
88,295 

91,516 
110,430 
107,476 

55,452 
93,823 



89,027 



81,780 
62,758 



t- a 



£3 

** BJ 

3§ 

O V 

"° 
m > 

~~ — 

J= BJ 
V 

J3 
H 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



61 



years. Upon the last legislature, and 
especially upon the present Governor 
rests in large measure the responsibil- 
ity for the result. 

And further, the leading candidates 
of the leading parties, while pretend- 
ing otherwise, were really reaction- 
aries. Thus the plan was laid to 
"swat" everything that had made 
Wisconsin famous. In this strong 
negative purpose, every proposition 
went down to defeat. Shall we lose 
hope? Of course not. The voters of 
Wisconsin will yet retrieve them- 
selves. They have made a great mis- 
take; but they will correct it. They 
will learn from this lesson to be more 



discriminating in future, and not al- 
low themselves to be misled. 



Wyoming 

Only one of the four amendments 
submitted by the legislature of Wy- 
oming was ratified. That was the 
workmen's compensation act, by the 
vote of 24,258 to 3,915. The defeated 
measures included a proposal to limit 
the legislative sessions to 60 days and 
forbid the introduction of any meas- 
ure after the first 40 days. This was 
voted down, 16,996' to 8,479. The 
others were of no general interest. 



Mr. Taft Again 

In an address at the annual dinner 
of the New England Society of De- 
troit, Dec. 19th, Ex-President Tafcft 
said: 

"The initiative, the referendum and 
the recall are a complete negation of 
the representative system established 
by the Pilgrims and Puritans. The 
greatest debt we owe the Pilgrims and 
Puritans' is for the principle of repre- 
sentative government." 

How can we account for the sur- 
prising misstatements Mr. Taft 
makes of and in connection with the 
Iinitiative and Referendum? Every- 
body knows that nobody wants to 
make these processes supplant repre- 
sentative government. The effort is 
merely to perfect representative gov- 
ernment when it goes wrong — and 
corr/uption has made it go wrong 
many times, particularly in our city 
governments. 

And isn't it news that we are in- 
debted to the Pilgrims and Puritans 
for the principle of representative 
government? Certainly Mr. Taft 
knows better. How can he risk his 
reputation for scholarship and histor- 
ical accuracy by making such state- 
ments? The roots of representative 
government extend far back into 
English history. 



He said further: 

"The initiative, referendum and re- 
call are a reversion to an earlier type 
of pure democracy that failed in 
Athens and Rome and that always has 
failed where it has been given a trial 
in any community except a small com- 
munity under peculiar conditions dif- 
ferent from ours." 

We do not wish to use these demo- 
cratic processes except when neces- 
sary to correct errors of representa- 
tive government This has been done 
successfully many times in the I. and 
R. states, and it should be the privi- 
lege of the people in every state. Rep- 
resentative government is in no dan- 
legislation in the I. and R. states and 
cities has been done by direct means, 
ger, for less than one percent, of the 
legislation in the I. and R. states and 
cities has been done by direct means, 
and as representation becomes better, 
the I. and R. will be called upon less 
and less; but they should always exist 
as primary rights in every city char- 
ter, and in every state constitution, 
for use when needed. Athens and 
Rome never knew the I. and R. as we 
use them — that is, as correctives for 
representative government. And as 
we use them they are not confined to 
local use. They are used successfully 
and conveniently over entire states, 
and could be used to get the opinion 



62 



Equity 



of the electorate of the entire United 
States on any specific measure. 

Further: 

"Legislation should be discussed and 
should be formulated to meet the de- 
fects that come out in discussion. That 
is what legislators are for. The de- 
tails of legislation involve that con- 
structive ability that only experts' can 
be expected to have." 

Certainly. All agreed. But when 
legislators are corrupted, or misled 
by partisan managers, as has been 
done many, many times, what shall 
we do? Should we have our hands 
tied, and be unable to do anything? 
Or should we have the means of final 
control? We want the service of ex- 
perts more and more in legislation, 
but we want the means of final con- 
trol in case of error or dishonesty. 

And further: 

"The recall is an institution calcu- 
lated to take all the courage and stiff- 
ening out of public officials and to 
make the agents of the public, jelly- 
fish in the most constructive work in- 
trusted to them, in doing the business 
of the people. It has the strongest 
tendency to limit the public servants 
to a listless and colorless performance 
of their duties in order not to arous*e 
the enmity of any one." 

The feasibility of discharge by 
employers has not made jellyfish of 
private employers. Why should it in 
the case of public employees? A 
private employee who would object 
to this privilege on the part' of his 
employer would be suspected of dis- 
honest designs. Why would not the 
same apply to a public employee? 

Mr. Taft hates the I. R. and R., par- 
ticularly the last. Is it because he 
was recalled from the presidency? 
Does he think that the people should 
not have had the right to do this act? 
Would a life presidential term have 
made him less a "jellyfish" in the 
White House? 



Distinction Between Legislative 
and Administrative Matters 
From San Francisco comes the 
news that the district court of ap- 



peals has decided that the Initiative 
and Referendum cannot be applied to 
administrative matters, but must be 
confined to legislative matters. The 
occasion for the decision was a writ 
of mandate to the district court of ap- 
peals asking that the city officials of 
Richmond, Cal., be compelled to sub- 
mit to the voters' Initiative and Ref- 
erendum petitions which had for their 
purpose the selection of a site for a 
city hall and the making of a contract 
for the erection of a municipal build- 
ing. 

While the Initiative and Referen- 
dum are legislative instruments, it is 
not always easy to draw a sharp line 
between legislative and administra- 
tive procedures. The selection of a 
city in which shall be located a state 
capitol is frequently submitted to the 
voters of the state. But the exact 
location of the building on a certain 
piece of ground may be considered an 
administrative matter, and also the 
making of the contract for the erec- 
tion of the building may be similarly 
construed. The court in the above 
mentioned case has so decided con- 
cerning the selection of a site and the 
making of a contract for a municipal 
building. These doubtful applications 
of the Initiative and Referendum 
principle will have to be worked out 
by experience. It is conceivable that 
it may be important to take the popu- 
lar opinion concerning the site of a 
municipal building, but the making of 
the contract for the construction of 
the building seems to us to be a pure- 
ly administrative act, and one which 
can be done much better by an ad- 
ministrative officer than by popular 
vote. However, some general restric- 
tions or regulations concerning pub- 
lic contracts may be matters of local 
legislation, hence these would be 
subject to Initiative and Referendum 
control. 



63 



Proportional Representation Department 

Edited by C. G. Hoag 

OFFICERS OF THE LEAGUE 

President, William Dudley Foulke 

Vice-Presidents, Prof. John R. Commons 
William S. U'Ren 
Mrs. Louis F. Post 

Honorary Vice-Presidents, The Rt. Hon. Earl Grey, Ex-Governor General of Canada 

The Rt. Hon. Lord Courtney of Penwith, England 

John H. Humphreys, Secretary of the Proportional Representation Society, London 

Count Goblet d'Alviella, Vice-President of the Senate, Belgium 

Professor E. J. Nanson, University of Melbourne, Australia 



Council 



Charles Francis Adams, Massachusetts 
Charles Frederick Adams... New York 

Felix Adler New York 

Dr. J. F. Baldwin Ohio 

W. E. Boynton Ohio 

Richard S. Childs New York 

Stoughton Cooley Illinois 

Alfred D. Cridge Oregon 

Horace E. Deming New York 

Rev. Charles F. Dole Massachusetts 

George H. Duncan New Hampshire 

John E. Eastmond New York 

John H. Gabriel Colorado 

Dr. Lucius F. C. Garvin. .Rhode Island 

William H. Gove Massachusetts 

Jane E. Harnett California 

Paxton Hibben Indiana 

William Hoag Massachusetts 

Jeremiah W. Jenks New York 



Daniel Kiefer Ohio 

Charles McCarthy Wisconsin 

Robert L. Owen Oklahoma 

Jackson H. Ralston. .Washington, D. C. 

Robert Treat Paine Massachusetts 

Eltweed Pomeroy Texas 

Daniel S. Remsen New York 

Linton Satterthwaite New Jersey 

J. Henry Scattergood Pennsylvania 

J. S. Schapiro New York 

Isaac Sharpless Pennsylvania 

Lieut. C. P. Shaw Virginia 

Moorfield Storey Massachusetts 

Dr. C. F. Taylor Pennsylvania 

Carl D. Thompson Illinois 

DeLancey Verplanck New York 

John M. Vincent Maryland 

Thomas Raeburn White, Pennsylvania 
Charles Zeublin Massachusetts 



General Secretary-Treasurer, C. G. Hoag, Haverford, Pa. 
(June 10th till October 1st, Tamworth, N. H.) 

Secretary-Treasurer for Canada, Robert Tyson, 20 Harbord Street, Toronto. 



P. R. FOR CITIES 
Los Angeles 

On December 31st Los Angeles 
votes on several amendments to its 
charter, among them one for the adop- 
tion of the City Manager Plan of 
administration and one for the elec- 
tion of the Council by proportional 
representation. 

The P. R. amendment of Los Angeles 
was drawn chiefly by Mr. George H. 
Dunlap of that city. The system 
covered by it is the "list." The amend- 
ment allows party names on the bal- 
lots and includes provisions for the 



nomination of condidates at primary 
elections. Though entirely different 
in phrasing from any P. R. provisions 
published by the P. R. League, it 
does not differ from the League's list 
system provisions essentially. 

If it passes, as seems likely, it will 
give the voters of Los Angeles sub- 
stantially true representation in the 
governing body of their city, a thing 
new, except by occasional good luck, 
in American municipalities. 

P. S. The City Council prevented a 
vote on the amendment by refusing to ap- 
propriate money for the election. 



64 



Equity 



St. Louis 

The new charter of St. Louis, adopt- 
ed last June, contains the following 
section in the article on elections: 
Section 9. Whenever it may be 
done in harmony with the State 
Constitution and laws, the Board 
of Aldermen shall by ordinance 
provide for and regulate muni- 
cipal elections and registration 
of voters, and may provide by 
ordinance for non-partisan nom- 
inations, preferential voting, or 
proportional representation. 
To provide for the election of the 
Board of Aldermen — the governing 
body of the city — by proportional rep- 
resentation, a proposed amendment to 
the city's primary law has been drawn 
by Percy Werner, Esq., and Dr. Wil- 
liam Preston Hill. This amendment 
provides the list system of P. R. for 
the nomination of candidates for the 
Board of Aldermen at the primaries, 
and / then adds provisions that make 
nomination equivalent, in this case, 
to election. The upshot of the amend- 
ment, therefore, is simply to provide 
the list system of P. R. for the single- 
chambered council of the city. 

The system of proportional represen- 
tation prescribed by the amendment 
is that covered by the provisions in 
the P. R. League's Leaflet No. I. 

Ashtabula, Ohio 

In Ashtabula a movement is on foot 
to amend the recently adopted char- 
ter, which is on the City Manager 
Plan, so as to have the council, a body 
of seven members, elected by the Hare 
system of P. R. The movement prom- 
ises to be successful, as proportional 
representation is fairly well under- 
stood in the city and is supported by 
several members of the commission 
which drafted the new charter. The 
provisions incorporated in the pro- 
posed amendment have been drawn 



up with unusual care. If adopted by 
Ashtabula, they will serve as a model 
for charter-makers throughout the 
country who favor the Hare system. 
It looks as if Ashtabula is likely to 
give its name to the plan of govern- 
ment that combines the Hare system 
of proportional representation with 
the City Manager Plan of government. 
If so, the "Ashtabula Plan" will 
make Ashtabula famous, for it will 
certainly be the last word in city 
government for some time to come. 

Medford, Oregon. 

Mr. Benjmain C. Sheldon, Secretary 
of the Charter Commission of Med- 
ford, writes us that the charter just 
adopted by the Commission is on the 
City Manager Plan and prescribes the 
Hare system, in a slightly modified 
form, for the election of the council. 
As the proposed charter has not yet 
been printed, we have not seen a 
copy of the election provisions. 
Other Municipal Items 
P. R. for the council is finding favor 
in Dunkirk, N. Y., and in Springfield, 
Mass. 

Manager Waite on P. R. 
In connection with a recent address 
on the City Manager Plan before the 
Charter Committe of One Hundred at 
Springfield, Mass, Mr. Henry M. 
Waite, City Manager of Dayton, Ohio, 
had occasion to comment on the elec- 
tion of the council by P. R. Follow- 
ing is the report of the incident by the 
Springfield Republican : 

In reply to a question Mr. 
Waite said he favored the elec- 
tion of a small commission at 
large and not by ward represen- 
tation. He said that the latter is 
bad, as it causes log-rolling for 
district favors. One ward wants 
one thing, he said, and another 
something else; so they trade for 
the favors. With a small com- 



Proportional Representation Department 



65 



mission you eliminate this and 
also get a high grade of man for 
the work. This prompted Mr. 
Phillips to ask if this wouldn't 
tend to eliminate popular rule 
and practically eliminate the 
rights of the minority. Mr. 
Waite granted that it would 
and he believed the country was 
coming to proportional represen- 
tation in these matters, so that 
the minority could have rights. 
"Dayton does not have it," he 
said, ''but I favor it and it cer- 
tainly would answer your ob- 
jections to the small commis- 
sion." 

National Municipal League 
At the annual convention of the 
National Municipal League at Balti- 
more in November proportional rep- 
resentation came in for a good deal 
of favorable comment. The president 
of the Municipal League, William Dud- 
ley Foulke, paid the reform a fine tri- 
bute in his annual presidential ad- 
dress. The Committee on Municipal 
Program (model charter) included 
proportional representation, as an al- 
ternative method of electing the coun- 
cil of a city, in the tentative draft of 
the model charter reported to the con- 
vention. In the discussion of the pro- 
posed model charter from the floor 
proportional representation was com- 
mended by several speakers and op- 
posed by none. It is to be hoped that 
the model charter finally approved by 
the Municipal League will make pro- 
portional representation at least the 
preferred method of electing a city 
council. It would be still better if it 
offered P. R. as the only method re- 
commended for a city council. 



To the Members of the N. Y. Con- 
stitutional Convention and the 
Members of State Legislature 

An Open Letter 
Gentlemen : 

I commend to your thoughtful at- 
tention the articles in this issue by 
the Hon. William Dudley Foulke, 
President of the National Municipal 
League, and John E. Eastmond. They 
show the grave defects of the repre- 
sentation of voters in their state 
legislatures and city councils. From 
Mr. Foulke's article it is evident that 
the cities of every state should be per- 
mitted, either through ordinary enact- 
ment or through constitutional amend- 
ment, to adopt proportional repre- 
sentation for the election of their 
councils. Much of the article applies 
equally well to the case of the state 
itself, showing that in each state 
steps should be taken at once to insure 
true representation in the legislature. 
Mr. Eastmond's article is written with 
special reference to the government 
of the State of New York. It should 
be taken to heart by the members of 
the Constitutional Convention that is 
about to meet there. 
Let me supplement both articles with 
some significant figures taken from a 
recent election of New York's fifty-one 
State Senators. I give round num- 
bers, made up from the World Al- 
manac of 1914. 

At the election of State Senators in 
New York in 1912 the Democrats, 
with 653,000 votes, elected 35. The 
Republicans, with 483,000 votes, elect- 
ed 16. The Progressives, with 289,000 
votes, the Socialists, with 59,000, and 
other parties . did not elect a single 
Senator. 

That our system of representation 
is wrong somehow is evident enough 
from a mere glance at these general 
results. But to understand just 
where it is wrong and how important 
the matter is requires a little more 
examination of the figures. 



66 



Equity 



On examining the returns from each 
district we find that the make-up of 
the Senate depended almost as much 
on the way the votes of each party 
were distributed throughout the dis- 
tricts as on their number. For ex- 
ample, in the three districts, 2, 7, and 
22, the Democrats cast 34,000 more 
votes than were necessary to win the 
three seats. Let us imagine that 
these 34,000 superfluous Democratic 
votes of the three districts mentioned 
had happened to be distributed to ad- 
vantage throughout the sixteen dis- 
tricts that were carried by the Re- 
publicans. In that case the Democrats 
could have won every one of the fifty- 
one seats in the Senate. For that re- 
sult to have come about it was not 
necessary that a single voter in the 
state should have changed his vote. 
That it did not come about was due 
only to the fact that chance did not 
happen to favor the distribution of 
the Democratic votes to that extent. 

Consider now the returns of the 
several districts in respect to the 
temptation to corruption they reveal. 
By corruption I mean, of course, not 
only buying votes with cash but in- 
fluencing local political leaders, and 
through them their supporters, by 
such subtle sorts of corruption as the 
promise of easily-earned salaries from 
the public treasury. 

In District 39 the Democrats won 
by only 94 votes. For the Republicans 
to win that seat, therefore, required 
only the changing in that district 
(which polled over 28,000 votes, in 
all) of 48 votes from Democratic to 
Republican. In the 36th district it 
would have required changing 89 
votes to do the same thing. In a 
word, though in some of the districts 
the throwing of one or two thousand 
votes one way or the other would 
have made no difference at all in the 
result, in certain districts very few 
votes were enough to turn the scale. 



The temptation to corruption in the 
close districts is obvious. 

How many votes would it have been 
necessary for the Republicans to turn 
from the Democratic candidates to 
their own, in the closer districts which 
the Republicans lost, to have won 26 
of the 51 seats of the Senate, an ab- 
solute majority, instead of 16. Well, 
the Republicans would have secured 
such an absolute majority in the Sen- 
ate if they had beaten the Democrats 
in Districts 1, 6, 26, 27, 29, 31, 36, 
39, 43, and 48. And an examination 
of the returns from those districts 
shows that the change of less than 
7500 votes in all, rightly distributed 
in those districts, would have given all 
those seats to the Republicans. In 
that case we should have had the 
spectacle of a party that had polled 
only 490,500 votes having an abso- 
lute majority in the Senate in spite 
of the fact that one of the other par- 
ties had polled 645,500 votes — to say 
nothing of a third party having poll- 
ed 289,000 votes without getting even 
one spokesman in the Senate. 

One more point about these returns. 
In districts 1-24 inclusive, which com- 
prise half the population of the state, 
the Republicans cast about 167,000 
votes and the Progressives about 142,- 
000, both together about 309,000. But 
neither of these parties elected a sin- 
gle member to the Senate from this 
great block of districts — not even one 
spokesman. Each of these districts, 
it is true — these areas on the map — 
had a Senator, but 309,000 of the 
voters in the districts did not. Any 
member of a Constitutional Conven- 
tion who helps perpetuate, or does 
nothing to put an end to, such "repre- 
sentation" as this should be regarded 
as unworthy of the trust imposed in 
him. With the fact that 309,000 vot- 
ers in the block of districts mentioned 
got no representative put another fact, 
namely that the number of Democratic 



Proportional Representation Department 



67 



votes required to elect a Senator in 
District 20 was only about 8,000, and 
that it was less than 10,000 in several 
districts of the block. 

Such are the absurdities of our 
system of representation. A few 
votes in the right place have great 
political effect, a thousand votes in 
another place no effect whatever. A 
big premium is put on gerrymander- 
ing and on skillfully distributed cor- 
ruption. A minority party, number- 
ing, say, forty per cent of all, may 
either get no seat at all, or a large 
minority of the seat, a majority of 
the seats, or all the seats, just as may 
be determined by the distribution of 
its ballots on the right or wrong 
sides of the arbitrary imaginary lines 
that mark off our single-member 
districts. 

Would that sort of machinery do 
in a modern factory? Would it do in 
the organization of a big business cor- 
poration? If not, it certainly will not 
do as the very basis of the govern- 
ment of ten million persons. The 
mechanism of their democracy is the 
mechanism of supreme importance to 
our people: for the combination of 
efficiency with democracy is a very 
hard thing to attain where the num- 
bers concerned run into the millions. 
Yet the very basis of our mechanism 
of democracy, our system of repre- 
sentation, is often grossly unjust and 
always unstable. 

What should a state legislature be? 
It should be a body of men each of 
whom is sent to it by a unanimous con- 
stituency of voters sufficient in number to 
deserve a representative. 

How is the thing worked? Simply 
by throwing several single-member 
districts together and then letting any 
group of voters in the enlarged dis- 
trict elect as many of the members 
sent up from the district as its votes 
entitle it to. Nothing but common 
sense! 



With this system of representation 
you will elect a Senate really fit to 
levy taxes, spend taxes, and legislate 
generally. Each member of such a 
Senate will have as his constituency 
not one of our present districts, m 
which many of the voters — possibly 
even a majority of them — are opposed 
to him and what he stands for, but a 
constituency of about the same size 
that is made up wholly of voters who 
want him as their representative. 
Such a Senate, in short, will be the 
voters condensed correctly into the 
leaders who truly represent them poli- 
tically, whereas our present State 
Senates are the voters condensed ac- 
curately so far as geographical lines 
are concerned but most blunderingly 
in respect to political principles and 
type of personality. 

The only way to elect a truly repre- 
sentative body of fifty-one members 
is to carry out, as nearly as conditions 
will easily permit, two principles: (1) 
that no candidate shall have one 
of the seats who is not backed by 
approximately a fifty-first part of all 
who vote in the State, and (2) that 
any candidate who does have this 
backing shall be sure of a seat. 

There is no use in blinking the 
fact, by the way, that in a Senate 
elected in the wrong way some of the 
old faces will be missing. 

At my elbow is a mass of convinc- 
ing testimony from many leading 
statesmen in countries now using such 
a system of representation as that de- 
scribed above. But I must not as- 
sume that you have the patience to 
read much more besides the articles 
by Mr. Foulke and Mr. Eastmond. 
I will therefore give you, from the 
mass of foreign testimony to the mer- 
its of proportional representation, 
only the views, in a nutshell, of three 
leading statesmen, representing three 
different parties, of Sweden. In that 
country proportional representation is 



68 



Equity 



in use for the election of both Houses 
of Parliament and also of city coun- 
cils. 

D. P. I. Talberg, Deputy Speaker 
(Liberal) of the Lower House: "It 
has distinctly raised the intellect- 
ual level of the Representatives .... 
a great step forward in Swedish 
political life." 

A. Lindman, Late Prime Minister 

(Conservative) : "All the parties 

appear to like the new method." 

H. Branting, leader of the Social 
Democratic Party in the Lower 
House: "The thought of returning to 
majority voting is certainly not now 
entertained in any quarter." 

Is it not your duty, as a patriot, to 
do all you can to help your state to 
adopt this reasonable and stable basis 
for her own government and to grant 
it also to her cities? 

Respectfully yours, 

C. G. Hoag. 
Haverford, Pa. 



Proportional Representation 
in New York State 



By John E. Eastmond 

Department Editor's Note: This ar- 
ticle was written as a letter to the New 
York World in connection with an edi- 
torial that appeared in that paper on 
December 3rd. For several slight 
changes the Department Editor is re- 
sponsible. 

Dec. 14, 1914 
The Editor of the New York World: 

Your editorial on "A Partisan Con- 
stitution" in a recent issue was very 
timely and to the point. The method 
of choosing delegates to the New 
York State Constitutional Convention 
was indeed absurb, and must largely 
detract from the result of the delib- 
erations of the delegates, unless they 
rise superior to the considerations 
that are likely to guide them, and 



which have controlled delegates to 
former conventions. 

If any system of proportional rep- 
resentation had been used in the elect- 
ing of delegates, the views of the 
voters would have been represented 
in the same proportion as those 
views had supporters among the elec- 
tors. Had a proportional method been 
used, so far as the present tabulation 
of returns show, and assuming that 
all of the parties had nominees for 
delegates, the delegates to the Con- 
stitutional Convention would be dis- 
tributed among the several political 
parties as follows: 

Republican ' 81 

Democratic 49 

Independence League 15 

American 8 

Prohibition « 7 

Progressive 5 

Socialist 3 

Total membership of the Convention 168 

The actual result, using the method 
as prescribed in the present Consti- 
tution, was this: 

Republicans i 116 

Democrats 52 

168 
In other words, every elector who 
voted for Independence League, 
American, Prohibition, Progressive, 
and Socialist candidates was dis- 
franchised, in all 334,000 voters, or 
over 23 per cent, of the total voting. 
But those actually disfranchised were 
in much greater numbers, for all men 
who voted for a defeated candidate, 
Republicans and Democrats alike, 
were equally disfranchised, for they 
have no direct representation what- 
ever, excepting that the Republicans 
elected the fifteen delegates-at-large. 
This will probably bring the total of 
disfranchised voters to about 550,000 



Proportional Representation Department 



69 



more, or a grand total of 884,000 out 
of a total vote of 1,432,000, making 
the disfranchised over 61 percent, of 
the whole. What a travesty on "rep- 
resentative" government! Such re- 
sults lead inevitably to the bitter feel- 
ings towards present methods which 
find expression in the Initiative and 
the Referendum on the one hand and 
anarchism on the other. 

It is bad enough when one man is 
elected in a district arbitrarily form- 
ed, as is now done in choosing assem- 
blymen, state senators, and Represen- 
tatives in Congress; but when three 
are chosen from one district, and the 
voter is permitted to vote for three 
candidates, it is worse still. The fif- 
teen delegates elected at large in the 
State cannot effect the inequity of the 
result. 

One of the proposals which will be 
presented to the new Constitutional 
Convention will be to have the dele- 
gates to future Constitutional Con- 
ventions and the members of the 
Legislature, whether the latter con- 
sists of one house or more, elected 
from districts large enough to entitle 
them to seven (or more) members. 
Each party, or group of voters, will 
then have its candidates' names, in 
number not exceeding the number of 
legislators to be chosen from the dis- 
trict, placed on the ballot below the 
title of the office. The voter will 
simply put a cross mark opposite the 
name of his favorite candidate. The 
votes will be counted precisely as they 
now are at each election district poll- 
ing place. When the Board of County 
Canvassers sit to make the final re- 
turns, they will add together the 
votes of all of the candidates of each 
party or group. They will then find 
the total votes cast for all candidates. 
Dividing this last number by the 
number of members to be elected, they 
get a quotient which is the "quota" 
necessary to elect one member. Each 



party, or group, is entitled to one 
member for each "quota" of votes 
that all of its candidates combined 
received. Those candidates of each 
party, or group of voters, in the order 
of the size of their respective votes, 
are declared elected to the places to 
which their party, or group, is en- 
titled. Any candidate running inde- 
pendently who receives a "quota" of 
votes is elected. The result will be 
that, if nine representatives are to be 
elected in a district, every party, or 
group of voters, will be entitled to as 
many representatives as all of its 
candidates combined received ninths 
of the total vote cast for all 
candidates for the office. Any inde- 
pendent candidate running alone who 
receives one-ninth of the total vote 
will also be elected. Thus each elect- 
ed legislator will represent one-ninth 
of the voters of his district. There 
will be practically no voter who has 
not a representative in the legislative 
body, either a man for whom he di- 
rectly voted or a man nominated by 
his party, or group, on the same 
ticket as that on which he voted for a 
candidate and in his own district. 
Every political view which can muster 
one-ninth of the voters will send a 
representative. The election method 
will act as a great safety valve and 
a promoter of interest among the 
voters, for each one will know that 
his vote is sure to count in the final 
result. 

Proportional representation is used 
with the very greatest satisfaction in 
Belgium, Sweden, Switzerland, Den- 
mark, the South African Union, Tas- 
mania, and parts of Germany. France 
was about to adopt it for the election 
of the Chamber of Deputies of its Par- 
liament when the War of Nations 
broke out. The new Irish Senate 
under the Home Rule Act, after the 
first five years, and a part of the 
Irish House of Commons from its in- 



70 



Equity 



ception will be elected by proportion- 
al representation. That seems to 
have been the one thing upon which 
all sides in the Irish controversy could 
agree, for it assures justice to every 
faction. Even Japan elects its Lower 
House of Parliament by proportional 
representation: they started with our 
system but quickly saw its glaring 
inequity and changed to their present 
method. The great party of the peo- 
ple in Germany and the Liberal party 
in British Columbia are committed 
to proportional representation. 

The result of proportional repre- 
sentation is to make the Initiative and 
the Referendum and the Recall very 
much less desirable or necessary from 
whatever point of view. The intel- 
lectual average of legislators will be 
perceptibly higher, for the incentive 
to hold office where a very small num- 
ber of votes, possibly one, may oust 
a tried legislator is not very alluring. 
That bane of representative govern- 
ment, the gerrymander, will be a 
thing of the past, for it will make no 
difference how the larger districts are 
formed, — the voters in those districts 
will have exact representation. 

John E. Eastmond 



Proportional Representation 

By William Dudley Foulke, LL. D. 

President of the National Municipal 
League and of the American Propor- 
tional Representation League. 

Departmet Editor's Note: Though 
written with special reference to the 
election of city councils, this article is 
almost equally applicable to the elec- 
tion of state legislatures. 

Men used the hour-glass when they 
had no better instrument for meas- 
uring time. They copied their manu- 
scripts by hand before the art of 
printing was invented. And in the 
development of popular institutions 
members of legislative bodies are 
elected from districts arbitrarily con- 



structed, one member from each dis- 
trict, because the people have not yet 
realized that there is a better way to 
secure representation. 

Relying on Chance 

It was evident from the beginning 
that this district system was a clumsy 
contrivance. It gave no security 
that the wishes of the people would 
be represented at all. A majority of 
the entire body politic might be so 
distributed that it would not control 
a majority of the districts. The State 
of New York can furnish illustrations 
of this. It has often occurred in the 
history of that state that the Gover- 
nor elected by the whole body of the 
people has been a Democrat, and yet 
that the Legislature was Republican 
and must have misrepresented the 
political views of the greater number 
of the voters of the state. Under the 
district system of representati m this 
could not be avoided, for the great 
Democratic majorities were massed in 
the city of New York and the repre- 
sentatives elected by these were more 
than offset by those chosen by the 
slenderer Republican majorities in 
other parts of the state. The great- 
est number of the voters could only 
secure the smaller number of the con- 
stituencies and could only elect a 
minority in the legislative body. 

At the election in Indiana two years 
ago the Democratic party polled only 
46 per cent, of the votes and yet it 
elected every one of the thirteen Con- 
gressmen from the state. 

Now this is not fair nor just. The 
answer, perhaps, will be something 
like this: "True, the present system 
works occasional injustice; but so do 
all general laws. It is, indeed, a sort 
of chance representation, but in the 
long run the chances are that the 
majority party will control a major- 
ity of the districts. We know of no 
better way to select our representa- 
tives, and until you can show us 



Proportional Representation Department 



71 



something more perfect, we must 
stick to the old plan." But it is none 
the less true that the system leads to 
a misrepresentation of the people. 
There is no doubt that an evil exists. 
The only question is, is there an ap- 
propriate remedy? 

Gerrymandering 

The case is often bad enough where 
no conscious effort is made to pre- 
vent fair representation, but it is ten- 
fold worse when a party in the pos- 
session of temporary authority seeks 
to entrench itself in power by pur- 
posely dividing the districts in such a 
manner as to give itself a vast and 
unjust majority, so that the other 
party cannot secure control of the 
representative body even if the tide 
turns and a majority of all the voters 
demand a change. I refer to the ger- 
rymander. It is needless to cite in- 
stances of this. They are familiar to 
all. The plan pursued is to divide the 
districts in such a way that the party 
in power will have its vote scattered 
over many districts, which it will car- 
ry by small majorities, while the ad- 
verse party will carry a few districts 
by large majorities. In this way an 
unscrupulous political organization 
-will secure in the representative body 
thirty, forty, or fifty per cent, more 
members than it is justly entitled to 
and will often retain control of the 
^representative body long after it has 
Abeen defeated by the popular vote. 
This is simply usurpation under the 
form of law. It is a fraud upon the 
rights of the voters. It is incompat- 
ible with healthy republican govern- 
ment. If extensive enough and con- 
tinued long enough, it would make 
our institutions a mere mockery of 
popular sovereignty. 

Again, the different sections of a 
state or city continually change in 
population. Frequent readjustments 
of electoral districts become neces- 
sary, and the constitutions of many 



of our states provide that reappor- 
tionments of these shall be made at 
stated periods a few years apart. 
This also illustrates the clumsy char- 
acter of the district system. With 
each recurring apportionment there is 
the same wearisome political struggle 
between the parties, the one in power 
seeking to take unfair advantage of 
its competitor. 

In England the history of the rot- 
ten boroughs and the successive re- 
form bills are illustrations of awk- 
ward, temporary, and imperfect at- 
tempts to remedy the inequalities 
caused by the changes of time and the 
shifting of population. It shows that 
the district system, which requires 
these readjustments, is as crude and 
unsatisfactory as a steam engine 
which would require the hand of the 
engineer to turn on the steam with 
«ach motion of the piston and to reg- 
ulate the speed of the engine. What 
we need is an automatic valve and a 
governor — something that demands 
no constant readjustment; we want a 
system by which constituencies shall 
form themselves and constantly adapt 
themselves to new requirements, just 
as the forms of organic life adjust 
themselves to their environments. If 
there were a few large districts re- 
turning many members to the legis- 
lative body by proportional represen- 
tation, the temptation to resort to the 
gerrymander would be eliminated and 
the need of reapportionment would be 
greatly reduced. 
Arbitrary Geographical Constituencies 
The defects of the district system 
may be illustrated in other ways. 
Popular government as we know it 
to-day is government by political 
parties. The men who think alike 
will naturally act together. The un- 
ion of these constitutes a party, and 
yet this district system, while it often 
forces men artificially into parties 
with the principles of which they do 



72 



Equity 



not agree, also prevents in many 
cases the normal and healthy union 
of tHose who think alike and desire to 
vote for the same candidate. These 
are now separated from each other 
by arbitrary district lines and are 
prevented from, acting together. I 
live in a district where Smith resides. 
He is my candidate. I support him 
with enthusiasm, but my neighbor 
who lives in the next ward and who 
feels just as I do cannot vote for 
Smith at all. He is in another dis- 
trict. He must take his choice be- 
tween Jones and Robinson, both of 
whom he cordially dislikes, and he 
must choose the lesser of these evils, 
or else not vote at all. "There is no 
law to prevent men from uniting to 
build ships and railroads to the ex- 
tent of their capital. But here we 
have a law which says to the voters: 
You shall not combine your voting 
capital — your ballots — to elect even 
one representative unless you all live 
in the same district." The Pennsyl- 
vania Railroad Company is a corpor- 
ation whose road passes through 
many districts and several states. 
What should we think of a rule di- 
viding stockholders by geographical 
lines and prohibiting those residing in 
different districts from voting for the 
same directors, although the chief in- 
terests and purposes of all the stock- 
holders are not sectional but common 
to every part of the road? And it is 
equally true in political elections that 
in the great majority of cases the 
reasons which control the votes of the 
electors relate to the whole commun- 
ity, not merely to a part of it. 
Corruption 
Another disadvantage of the single- 
member district system is the facility 
which it offers to corruption. The 
great mass of our voters are honest. 
To think otherwise is to disbelieve in 
popular government. Even the most 
venal of politicians, the man who 



makes vote-buying his business, will 
not often say that more than 10 or 
15 per cent, of the voters are directly 
corruptible. Yet money has often 
controlled our elections. Why is this? 
Because our system of dividing our 
states and cities into districts, each 
district electing a single representa- 
tive, naturally results in several close- 
ly contested districts where the 
change of a few votes will secure a 
different representative, and the 
change of a few representatives se- 
lected from these districts will change 
the entire character of the legislative 
body. Now the vote buyer confines 
his activities to these pivotal dis- 
tricts. He has, let us say, some 
scheme of popular spoliation — a new 
franchise or contract with the gas 
company or water works. Four of 
the wards will send to the city council, 
by large majorities, members who are 
against his project. It. will be useless 
to spend his money there. Three oth- 
er wards will elect men who are fav- 
orable to his project. He will not 
squander his substance there. But 
there are two other districts where 
the majority against him is small, 
and one hundred votes in each will 
win the day. Here it is that his 
emissaries are set to work. The votes 
are bought, the council is carried, and 
an odious monopoly is saddled upon 
the city. A great majority of the 
citizens are opposed to it, but their 
voices are stifled by an arbitrary 
system which makes a hundred pur- 
chased votes of more political value 
than a thousand which are freely giv- 
en. If districts were abolished and 
representation were proportional, the 
vote buyer could not purchase a larg- 
er proportion of councilmen than 
would be properly represented by the 
votes he bought. Not only would in- 
finitely more money be required for 
such an operation and the chances of 
detection be greatly increased (both 



Proportional Representation Department 



73 



powerful deterrents of the corrupt 
scheme) but the cases would be rare 
where the votes bought would be num- 
erous enough to change the result. 

And more than this, there have 
been times in the political history of 
some of our cities where the rule of 
the ring has been so firmly fastened 
upon each of the districts created by 
the ring that there could not be elect- 
ed from a single one of these a man 
with sufficient honesty and courage to 
expose and denounce the iniquities of 
the ring. But if throughout the whole 
city the men who think alike could 
vote together, then "the wire pullers," 
with all the votes they could purchase 
and all the tricks they might invent, 
would not be able to prevent a single 
quota of intelligent and honest voters 
from electing the man of their choice. 
The corrupt element would be drawn 
off and represented in proportion to 
its numbers, leaving the honest por- 
tion uninjured, and the current of 
political life would thereby be puri- 
fied. 

Real Freedom for the Voter 
Another evidence of the crudity of 
our present system of single-membered 
constituencies is seen in the immense 
loss of voting power, the great num- 
ber of wasted votes in each election. 
In every campaign we hear the argu- 
ment addressed to some member of a 
minority party: "Don't throw your 
vote away." The argument is indeed 
very often an unsound one. It is far 
better that I should throw my vote 
away in voting for what I believe to 
be right than that I should make my 
vote effective for what I am sure is 
wrong. Yet the claim that it is bet- 
ter to support the lesser of two pos- 
sible evils than to vote for an impos- 
sibility has sometimes great weight, 
and it often forces into one of the 
larger parties many reluctant voters 
on account of the evident futility of 
any other course. The district system, 



therefore, involves a large amount of 
coercion and constraint upon the in- 
dividual elector. If representation 
could be proportional, if the voter 
stood some chance of electing his own 
man, of sending up a representative 
who believed what he believed al- 
though only one in ten in the whole 
body politic might stand with him, he 
would vote his real convictions. Now 
it is impossible for him to do this. 
Proportional representation, there- 
fore, stands for greater freedom of 
choice in the elector. It stands for 
liberty. 

Justice 
But even if the electors in casting 
their votes are perfectly free, and 
their votes represent their real senti- 
ments, still it commonly results that 
nearly half, in some cases more than 
half of these votes are thrown away. 
If I am a Republican and a Democrat 
is elected in my district, my vote has 
been in vain. In like manner every 
Democrat in a Republican district is 
unrepresented. No adherent of a 
smaller party can look upon any 
member of the legislative body as his 
own representative. There is evi- 
dently a great waste of voting power. 
We cherish the right of suffrage very 
highly. We denounce all abuses of 
that right as a grave menace to free 
institutions. The Republicans were 
eloquent for many years upon the 
subject of the crime, as they called 
it, of depriving the negro of his vote 
in the Southern States. Yet a vote is 
a mere means of securing representa- 
tion. If the right to vote be so prec- 
ious, the right to secure that repre- 
sentation is even more precious, 
for the right of suffrage is a 
barren right when it accomplishes no 
results. Under the present system 
nearly one-half of the entire voters 
of our state are practically disfran- 
chised, for they are unable to secure 
the representatives for whom they 



74 



Equity 



voted. And whenever a vote is thus 
wasted upon a candidate who is not 
elected, some one else gets more than 
his share of representation. Where 
half the votes are ineffective, the 
votes of the remainder are equal to 
two votes each. In a constituency 
of 1000 voters 501 votes have as much 
power in representation as the whole 
1000. The effect is much the same as 
if 501 voted twice and the 499 did not 
vote at all. This is manifestly unfair. 
So far as may be, each voter ought 
to be represented in the proportion 
which his vote bears to the entire con- 
stituency. This alone is equitable and 
just. Proportional representation 
stands not only for greater liberty, 
but for more perfect justice. 

Small Men or Big ? 
Another objection to small dis- 
tricts (and districts electing a single 
member are the smallest possible) is 
that they lead to the election of small 
men. The horizon of a ward is more 
limited than that of a city, and the 
man who goes to the council as the 
representative of his ward will na- 
turally be a smaller man with nar- 
rower ideas than one who goes as one 
of the representatives of the entire 
city. The system of dividing the 
community into small districts and 
electing one member from each has 
led to the rule (established by cus- 
tom) that the member elected must 
reside within the district which he 
represents. In some cases, indeed, 
this is prescribed by law. The result 
is that the competition of available 
candidates is confined to the narrow 
limits of the district. The member 
elected is regarded, and he regards 
himself, rather as the representative 
of his district than of the entire com- 
munity. He is in fact charged with 
the interests of the whole. It is his 
duty to aid in the enactment of ordin- 
ances for the benefit of all. He ought 



to feel that he has the interests of all 
in his keeping, not merely the inter- 
ests of the voters of his own district; 
but this view of the matter is kept 
out of sight by the district system. 
We all recognize that sectional ques- 
tions are subordinate to general 
questions. The very words "ward 
politics" express our contempt of this 
inferior class of questions. A man of 
ability and reputation will be re- 
luctant to be the mere representative 
of a ward in the city council; but he 
would take a far different view of his 
office if he were one of the representa- 
tives of the city, elected at large from 
the whole body of people. Proportion- 
al representation will produce broader 
men, and they will act upon broader 
principles. The voters will not look 
merely for the best man in the ward, 
but for the best man in the city. A 
larger area of competition will ne- 
cessarily produce a higher class of 
representatives. 

The Enfranchisement of the Elected 
There is another reason why the 
present system is apt to secure infer- 
ior men. The principal question con- 
sidered when a candidate is nominated 
for office is his availability — how 
many votes will he poll? Who will 
vote for him and who will vote 
against him ? The man who has tak- 
en an active and aggressive part in 
public affairs makes many enemies. 
The man of high principle finds it 
necessary to tread upon the toes of 
many of those who will be his con- 
stituents in these small districts. 
Now, a man must be nominated who 
will not awaken this kind of opposi- 
tion — an agreeable man, a common- 
place man, a man who stands for no- 
thing. Again, the member who is 
elected from a single district, if he 
desires to be returned again, must 
see to it that he offends nobody. He 
must keep a safe position upon the 



Proportional Representation Department 



75 



fence in regard to all questions where 
his supporters are divided. The dis- 
trict system fastens servility upon the 
representative. Proportional repre- 
sentation, on the other hand, encour- 
ages the nomination of men of prin- 
ciple and character. It stimulates in- 
dependence and leadership, for if a 
member can retain a single quota who 
prefer him to all others, he can re- 
main true to his convictions. He can 
abandon the base arts by which poli- 
ticians seek popularity, if he knows 
that his re-election will be sure. A 
genuine leader need spend no time in 
placating his constituents, in trim- 
ming his sails to catch every favor- 
able breeze. Proportional represen- 
tation stands, then, for leadership 
against mediocrity. It will infinitely 
improve the character of the repre- 
sentative body. 

Blessings of Misrepresentation*. 

The main objection to proportional 
representation is that if every phase 
of thought were represented, the 
chances would be that the represen- 
tative body would always be made up 
of groups, no one of which could con- 
trol its action or be responsible for its 
legislative policy. And the worst 
consequences, it is contended, follow 
when some third party, or a handful 
of traitors in the regular party, holds 
the balance of power: an absolute 
majority one way or the other is al- 
ways desirable in a legislative body. 

This argument is necessarily based 
upon distrust of the people. The 
claim is that to secure a majority 
there ought to be misrepresentation. 
Is it true, then, that an absolute ma- 
jority is always desirable? For exe- 
cutive and administrative purposes 
this may be the case. A unity of pur- 
pose, a single will, is necessary to 
confront a foreign foe with the 
greatest effectiveness. Power is the 
advantage of autocracy. In adminis- 



tration, unity is necessary to good 
government; but is this true in legis- 
tive matters? For my own part I 
deny that an absolute majority in a 
deliberative assembly is desirable if 
there be no such majority in the peo- 
ple at large. If mere speed and con- 
venience in legislation were consider- 
ed, it might be desirable. But we have 
adopted two different principles for 
the two forms of our political action; 
for executive action, unity; for legis- 
lative action, plurality. Why is this ? 
Because deliberation, compromises, 
and the consideration of different 
ideas are necessary for the highest 
form of legislative action. 

Our experience in jurisprudence 
tells us that the best means of in- 
forming the court and arriving at an 
accurate judgment is to allow each 
party to set forth its own views, its 
own interests, in the most extreme 
and unfair way, subject to contradic- 
tion and refutation by those who have 
adverse interests and views. Is it 
less true that in legislation the best 
conclusion will be reached by allow- 
ing each phase of thought to be repre- 
sented by its own advocates, and 
then, after consideration of all these, 
letting that judgment be given which 
seems to be most fair and just to all. 
We merely apply to the legislature 
the principles which we have long ap- 
lied in judicial procedure. The result 
of nearly all political action is com- 
promise. In the present system this 
compromise is made when parties are 
organized. When proportional repre- 
sentation is adopted it will be made in 
the legislative body where all can see 
more clearly the strong and the weak 
points of every claim. Suppose you 
are in favor of some particular re- 
form — civil service reform, for in- 
stance — will you have a better chance 
of success when you urge your claims 
upon one of the parties in the turmoil 
of a political contest or when these 



76 



Equity 



claims can be fully presented by your 
own representatives in the legislative 
body? 

The List System of proportional 
representation has now been tested 
by satisfactory practical experience. 
It is fair and just to all. It elimin- 
ates the possibility of the gerryman- 
der. It reduces to a minimum the un- 
represented minority. It recognizes 
party lines while allowing the greatest 
freedom to those desiring to be in- 
dependent of party. The representa- 



tives which this system will give 
will be the people themselves 
in miniature. Their representa- 
tive body will be like the image in 
the camera; every light, color, shade, 
form and motion will be reproduced 
in miniature within the physical 
space necessary for deliberation and 
legislative action. 

If we have faith in popular institu- 
tions, let us not hesitate to trust that 
kind of representation which will for 
the first time truly embody them. 



THE SHORT BALLOT DEPARTMENT. 

Edited by H. S. Gilbertson, executive secretary of The National Short Ballot Organization, 
383 Fourth Avenue, New York City. 
Officers of the Short Ballot Organization: President, Woodrow Wilson. Vice-Presidents, 
Winston Churchill; Horace E. Deming; Ben B. Lindsey; William S. U'Ren; William Allen White; 
Clinton Rogers Woodruff; John Mitchell, Mt. Vernon, N. Y. Advisory Board, Lawrence F. Abbott, 
Richard S. Childs, Henry Jones Ford, Norman Hapgood, Woodrow Wilson. Secretary and Treas- 
urer, Richard S. Childs. Executive Secretary, H. S. Gilbertson. 



Bright Prospects in New York. 



The result of the New York cam- 
paign for the Short Ballot this year 
will have very great strategic import- 
ance 'for the whole movement through- 
out the United States. Fortunately, 
the Constitutional Convention which 
meets in April is composed of men 
who, despite their conservatism on 
many subjects, make common cause 
with those who favor the simplifica- 
tion of government, to the end that 
the average citizen may select his 
public representatives with intelligent 
discrimination. Conspicuous lights in 
the convention, such as Elihu Root, 
Henry L. Stimson, Seth Low, Herbert 
Parsons, etc., not only do not need to 
be convinced of the merit and import- 
ance of the Short Ballot principle, but 
they may be expected to go into the 
convention with a militant purpose to 



have the principle written into the 
constitution. 

Only one member of prominence, to 
wit: Edgar Truman Brackett of Sara- 
toga Springs, can be counted on as 
an enemy of the movement. Mr. 
Brackett's name is closely associated 
with the history of the old guard and 
entrenched standpatism. He bases his 
principle opposition on the argument 
that nothing should be done to in- 
crease, but everything to decrease the 
power of the executive and to exalt 
the legislature. Curiously enough, 
Mr. Brackett does not realize that the 
Short Ballot advocates and he are on 
common ground in this respect. That 
is to say, if the Short Ballot principle 
is carried out to its logical limits, it 
would mean that only policy-determin- 
ing officers would be elective and that 
the executive would be subordinated 
to the legislative branch, either by 
means of something analogous to the 
city manager plan or by the adoption 



of the parliamentary system of gov- 
ernment. And so, Mr. Brackett's keen 
intellect may even yet bring him 
around to the point where he will be 
the most radical of all Short Ballot 
advocates! 

Shortly before the November elect- 
ion a canvass of all the candidates 
for delegate to the Constitutional 
Convention was made by the Short 
Ballot Organization. This brought 
in 129 replies. Of this number all 
but six expressed themselves as in 
favor of the general principle, two 
were against the idea, but only one 
of them (Mr. Brackett) was elected. 
Four of the delegates were non-com- 
mittal. 

Of 123 favoring the Short Ballot 
idea in general, practically all favored 
taking the principal administrative 
state officers off the ballot and provid- 
ing for their appointment by the Gov- 
ernor. A few of this number thought 
that the comptroller should remain on 
the elective list. 

Seventy-four of the 123 were in 
favor of a constitutional amendment 
which would remove the present re- 
quirement that all the principal county 
officers must be elective. Twenty- 
nine were non-committal or undecided, 
and twenty were against the proposi- 
tion. 

Forty-three were definitely in favor 
of making the Court of Appeals ap- 
pointive. The question was so stated 
that it is impossible to determine how 
many of the rest were undecided or 
non-committal and how many were 
against the appointed judiciary. 

Eighty-five favored a four-year term 
for the Governor, 12 were against the 
plan and the remainder were non- 
committal, except three, who favored 
a three-year term and one who favor- 
ed a six-year term. 



The Short Ballot Department 77 

Seventy-nine believed that the Gov- 
ernor in making appointments should 
have complete responsibility for the 
same and should not be required to 
submit his judgments to the Senate. 
Fourteen definitely favored the present 
system of divided responsibility. 
Thirty were undecided or non-com- 
mittal. 

On the application of the Short Bal- 
lot to the legislative side of the gov- 
ernment, very little has yet been said. 
The New York Times, however, comes 
out with the interesting though not 
altogether original suggestion that the 
number of representatives in either 
house of the legislature be materially 
reduced, with the idea of increasing 
the importance of legislative positions 
and thereby inviting a greater interest 
and attention on the part of the voter. 

Immediately after the election on 
November 3rd. the New York Short 
Ballot Organization questioned 5000 
voters (names taken from telephone 
directory), in New York City and su- 
burban and rural sections: 

"Do you remember the name of the 
candidate you voted for (1) for lieu- 
tenant-governor, (2) for comptroller 
(3) for attorney-general, (4) for sec- 
retary of state (5) for state treasurer, 
(6) for state engineer, (7) for judge, 
court of appeals?" Between 700 and 
800 replies were received, showing 
that the percentage of those replying 
who did not remember the name of 
the candidate they voted for was as 
follows : 

For lieut.-governor, . . 29 percent 

11 comptroller, 44.4 " 

" att.-general 40 " 

« sec. of state, 31 

" state treasurer, . . 37 " 

" state engineer, . . 36 " 

* judge, court of 

appeals, 28 " 



78 



Equity 



There was no check, of course, on the 
veracity of the signers. 

This census seems to dispose, rather 
effectively of the claim that though 
the voters neglect other officers they 
do know and care about the comp- 
trollership. 

Governor-elect Whitman has ex- 
pressed himself on the Short Ballot 
as follows: 

"I am for the Short Ballot. I think 
the only elective officers of the State 
should be the Governor, Lieutenant- 
Governor and possibly the Comptroll- 
er. The Attorney-General should cer- 
tainly be appointed by the Governor. 
He is the legal adviser to the Gover- 
nor and all the state departments, and 
his functions are similar to those of 
both Corporation Counsel and Dis- 
trict Attorney. 



Better County Government. 

On November 13th and 14th there 
was held at Schenectady, N. Y. what 
was probably the first state-wide Con- 
ference for the improvement of county 
government ever held in the United 
States. A careful search was made 
all over the state for officials, civic 
organizations and private individuals 
interested in this subject. This can- 
vass resulted in the discovery of a 
small handful of civic organizations 
and not a few county and state offi- 
cials who were willing to expend the 
necessary time and money to attend 
the Conference. About 100 people 
were in attendance and the following 
papers were read: 

"What Research in Westchester 
County Reveals concerning County 
Government," Otho G. Cartwright, 
Secretary Westchester County Re- 
search Bureau. 



''Administration of County Chari- 
ties," V. Everit Macy, Superintendent 
of the Poor, Westchester County. 

"Taxation and County Government 
in New York State," Henry J. Cook- 
inham, County Attorney, Oneida 
County. 

"The County Auditor," Geo. S. Buck, 
Auditor, Erie County. 

"The County Judiciary," Herbert 
Harley, Secretary American Judica- 
ture Society, Chicago. 

"The Sheriff and a State Constabu- 
lary," Ernest Cawcroft, Deputy State 
Treasurer, Albany. 

"The County Manager Plan," Rich- 
ard S. Childs, Secretary, National 
Short Ballot Organization. 

At the close of the meeting provi- 
sion was made for a permanent or- 
ganization and it is likely that similar 
conferences will be held annually. 
The prime object of the gathering was 
to influence the coming Constitutional 
Convention to take steps toward the 
simplification of county government, 
primarily by removing the requirement 
in the present constitution that all of 
the principal county officers be inde- 
pendently elected. It seemed to be 
the concensus of opinion that the ideal 
method of dealing with the county 
problem in New York would be to 
have the legislature pass a law pro- 
viding several simplified forms of 
county goverment, any one of which 
could be adopted by the people of the 
county according to local needs and 
the degree of their advancement. The 
papers presented at the Conference 
will be published in pamphlet form 
and may be obtained of the editor of 
this department on request. 



Extremes Meet. 
One of the peculiarities of the Short 
Ballot movement is the way in which 



it commends itself to both progressive 
and conservative political thinkers. 
One of the most striking instances of 
this community of opinion is brought 
out in an editorial from the paper 
edited by Mr. William Allen White, 
(The Emporia (Kan.) Gazette), one 
of the original insurgents, and also 
probably the most prominent member 
of the Progressive Party in the State 
of Kansas. The editorial follows: 

"For six or eight years the editor 
of the Gazette has been one of the 
vice presidents of the National Short 
Ballot Organization. During that time 
Woodrow Wilson was president and 
Brand Whitlock and W. S. U'Ren of 
Oregon and Senator Owen were also 
vice presidents. Now comes our good 
old army enemy, Barnes of New York, 
and joins. We welcome Barnes. He 
is on the right line. He evidently 
is getting tired of the boss business or 
he wouldn't be in the short ballot 
movement. For on a long ballot only 
the boss knows the candidates, and 
can vote wisely. On a short ballot 
all the people may know all the can- 
didates. Boss Barnes was elected to 
the constitutional convention of New 
York last week by a comforting ma- 
jority. He declared for jthe short 
ballot as one of his cardinal principles. 
If there had been but two candidates 
and the other had been against the 
short ballot and had been subject to 
Tammany influence, Barnes would 
have had to bear up under the odium 
of our vote. 

The Short Ballot is the natural com- 
plement of the primary laws. It is 
the next important change in Ameri- 
can government. The primary is of 
no importance with a long ballot; for 
no matter how much power you give 
the people, they cannot use it wisely 
unless they know the candidates they 
are voting for. And the only way to 



The Short Ballot Department 79 

know the candidates they are voting 
for, and later the kind of public ser- 
vants those candidates make, is to 
shorten the ballot in the election, and 
concentrate authority and power in 
government. 

The fact that Barnes is for this 
proposition does not weaken our faith 
in the proposition, but it does strength- 
en our faith in the Masonic theory of 
humanity that there is some good in 
every one." 



Growth of City Manager Plan 

The city manager plan still contin- 
ues to gain favor. November 3rd was 
a red letter day. In New York State, 
Niagara Falls adopted the plan under 
the optional city government law. Ash- 
tabula, Ohio and Jackson, Michigan, 
accepted the plan under special home- 
rule charters. Shortly before this 
time the town of Alhambra, California, 
came under this charter. This makes 
a total of twenty-two cities scattered 
far and wide throughout the United 
States. The idea is even capturing 
such a stronghold of conservatism as 
Springfield, Mass. where the drafting 
sub-committee of the Charter Com- 
mittee of 100 has gone on record by 
a vote of 11 to 4 in favor of the new 
system. Los Angeles, Cal. will vote 
on December 28th a very much modi- 
fied form of city manager plan. The 
proposed charter amendment, however, 
will leave a number of administrative 
officers elective and give the mayor 
the veto power, together with the ap- 
pointment of members of the police 
commission, art commission, civil ser- 
vice commission and city prosecutor. 
The division of the responsibility is so 
great that the adoption of the charter 
could hardly be considered a triumph 
for the straight-out city manager plan. 
H. L. Gilbertson. 



THE INITIATIVE: The process through which a stated 
number or percentage of qualified voters may, at their option, 
require the submission of any measure to the electorate at a 
regular or special election. Applies to constitutional amend- 
ments as well as statutes. 

THE REFERENDUM: The process through which a 
stated number or percentage of qualified voters may, at their 
option, compel the reference of any measure passed by the 
legislature to the entire electorate at a regular or special 
election. Sometimes called the voters' veto power. 

THE RECALL: The process through which a stated 
number or percentage of qualified voters may, at their option, 
compel the submission of the question whether a given official 
shall be removed from office or not. 

THE PETITION: A duly legalized and officially 
distributed form asking for the submission of a proposition 
to the voters, and to which the signatures of voters may be 
attached. 

THE EMERGENCY CLAUSE: A statement inserted 
after the enacting clause of a measure {usually by a % vote 
of the legislative body) declaring the proposed act to be immedi- 
ately necessary for the public peace, safety or health, and 
therefore that it must go into effect at once. 

PUBLICITY PAMPHLET: A book issued by the state 
or city containing the text of initiated and referred measures; 
should contain signed arguments for and against said measures, 
if any voter or body of voters desires to present them. 

PREFERENTIAL BALLOT: A ballot upon which the 
voters may express first and second or more choices of candi- 
dates for a given office. Designed to secure an election by a 
majority, when possible. Is applicable only to the election 
to a single office in a single district; as to the governor of a 
state, the mayor of a city, or one councilman from a district. 

PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION: A plan or 
system of choosing representative bodies so that all consider- 
able groups of voters may be represented in proportion to 
their numerical strength. 

THE SHORT BALLOT: Limiting the elective ballot 
to those offices which are important enough to attract and 
deserve public attention. 

DIRECT PRIMARY: The selection of candidates for 
office by the voters at a primary election instead of by party 
conventions. 



Equity 

[Formerly Equity Series] 

Devoted to improved processes of self government, including the 
Initiative and Referendum, the Recall, Proportional Representation, 
the Short Ballot, the Preferential Ballot, the One-chambered Legislative 
Body and whatever methods tend to increase the efficiency and democratic 
control of municipal, state, national and international government. 

isSSgcg? : Qu arterly Philadelphia, April 1915 

Contents 

EDITORIAL: Page 

Internationalism 83 

Freedom for Philadelphia 87 

"Spineless"" Legislatures 88 

Wilson Wants Word from His Boss 89 

A Quantitative Comparison 90 

"Inelasticity" of the Initiative. . 91 

Railroads and the People 94 

How to Set Congress Free 95 

The "Ledger" Almost Persuaded 97 

The Great Teacher — Experience 98 

Simplifying Our State Governments 99 

A So-Called Argument. 100 

Standards of Public Service Higher 101 

The Oregon Fish Story 102 

Compelling Men of Power to Vote 103 

THE INITIATIVE, REFERENDUM AND RECALL DEPARTMENT: 

Stampeding the Legislature 104 

Bryan Rebukes Hoosier Lawmakers 106 

Commission Government Analyzed 108 

THE MARCH OF POPULAR GOVERNMENT— Being a Quarterly Record of the 

Progress of Direct Legislation in the Various States 109 

Arizona 109 Maryland 116 Oklahoma 122 

Arkansas 110 Massachusetts 117 Pennsylvania 123 

California Ill Minnesota 118 Rhode Island 123 

Delaware 113 Nebraska 119 South Dakota 124 

Idaho 114 Nevada 120 Utah 125 

Illinois 115 New Jersey 120 Washington 125 

Indiana 115 New York .... 121 West Virginia 126 

Iowa 115 Ohio 122 Wyoming 127 

Book Reviews 127-131 

Newspaper Publicity Expensive 131 

A Disease and Its Remedy 13 1 

Status of the State-Wide Recall 132 

PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION DEPARTMENT: 

C. G. Hoag, Editor 

Charles Francis Adams 133 

P. R. Activities in Ontario 134 

Visit of the General Secretary of the League to Canada 137 

The Bailey Bill 137 

Professor Hatton on P. R 139 

THE SHORT BALLOT DEPARTMENT: 141 

H. S. Gilbertson, Editor 



Equity 

[Formerly Equity Series] 

Including the Direct Legislation Record, the Referendum News and the 
Proportional Representation Review. 

The purpose of this publication is to improve the machinery for self-government, to \ ro- 
mote honest and efficient government, and to place public affairs and public officials 
under direct final control of the electorate. The ideal is: That every American commun- 
ity — town, city and county — shall have the freest and simplest plan of self-government 
possible, resulting in the most efficient government possible: That every state shall have 
a short and simple constitution, fewer and better laws, and a more efficient government: 
That the National constitution shall be more easy to amend than at present, and thai it 
shall be possible for the people of the Nation to express themselves definitely concerning 
National issues whenever they may wish to do so: That the civilized governments of the 
world shall cooperate through a central organization to conserve life and property, re- 
placing the wanton destruction of war. 

Charles Fremont Taylor, Editor and Publisher 
Edwin S. Potter, Associate Editor 

1520 Chestnut St., Philadelphia, Pa. 



EDITORIAL 

J. W. Sullivan, New York City 

Founder of the Direct Legislation Record 
Eltweed Pomeroy, Donna, Texas 

Former Editor of the Direct Legislation Record 
Geo. H. Shibley, Washington, D. C. 

Founder of the Referendum News 
W. S. U'Ren, Oregon, 

Father of the "Oregon System" 
Senator Rob't. L. Owen 

President of the National Popular Govern- 
ment League 
Dr. Wm. Preston Hill, St. Louis, Mo. 

Father of the Initiative and Referendum in 
Missouri 
Robert M. La Follette 

U.S. Senator from Wisconsin 
Judge Ben B. Lindsey, Denver, Colo. 
Dr. John Randolph Haynes 
Los Angeles, Cal. 

Father of the Recall in California 
Dr. Wm. Draper Lewis, Philadelphia, Pa. 
Samuel Gompers 

President of American Federation of Labor 
Moses E. Clapp 

U. S. Senator from Minnesota 
Woodbridge N. Ferris 

Governor of Michigan 
George H. Hodges 

Ex-Governor of Kansas 



COUNSELORS 

George E. Chamberlain 

U. S. Senator from Oregon 
J. H. Ralston, Washington, D. C. 
Delos F. Wilcox New York 
L. F. C. Garvin 

Ex-Governor of Rhode Island 
George Norris 

U. S. Senator from Nebraska 
Miles Poindexter 

U. S. Senator from Washington 
Morris Sheppard 

U. S. Senator from Texas 
Prof. Chas. Zueblin 

Publicist and Lecturer 
M. Clyde Kflley 

Member of Congress from Pennsylvania 
William Allen White 

Editor. Emporia, Kan., Gazette 
Frances Kellor 

Chief of Progressive National Service 
Carl Vrooman, Bloomington, 111. 
Lieut. C. P. Shaw, Virginia 
George H. Duncan, New Hampshire 
James W. Bucklin, Grand Junction, Colo. 

Father of Grand Junction System of Prefer- 
ential Voting. 



Entered at the Philadelphia Post Office as Second-class Matter 



Single copies, 15 cents; 50 cents per year; three years, $1. To facilitate the spread of the causes 
represented by this magazine, four yearly subscriptions will be sent to different addresses for SI; 
special rates for yearly subscriptions or single numbers for propaganda purposes supplied on applic- 
ation. 

Some of our enemies say that the people are not fit to initiate laws. The fact is 
that the laws that have been created by the Initiative compare favorably with the laws 
created by legislatures. There are no "freak" laws among the initiated laws. As a 
rule they are simple, brief and to the point. They accomplish just what was intended 
by their sponsors. No initiated law has ever been declared unconstitutional. Unfortu- 
nately these compliments cannot be applied to laws made by legislatures. No laws 
are so deliberately thought out and so carefully prepared as initiated laws. 



EDITORIAL 



VOL. XVII— No. 2 April, 1915 



INTERNATIONALISM 



A Review of the Proposals Before 
Congress Looking to a Construc- 
tive Conference of the Nations, 
and a Plea for American Action. 

Nationalism has created magnifi- 
cent civilizations. Witness the English 
civilization, the German civilization, 
the French civilization, etc. But 
when these civilizations clash and 
destroy one another, something else 
is needed, else all progress in civil- 
ization is in vain. 

Nationalism has done its best. It 
has created national civilizations. 
But now, as the cause of the most 
destructive war in history, it is doing 
its worst. It is destroying what it 
created. 

The only power capable of restrain- 
ing the destructive force of nation- 
alism is inter-nationalism. A su- 
preme authority and power must be 
created by uniting the different na- 
tionalities into a conserving cooper- 
ation. The only instrument capable 
of doing this is an international gov- 
ernment endowed with super-national 
authority and power. It must have 
well defined organs, which must be 
created and endowed with sufficient 
power to accomplish their purpose. 

Many have suggested an interna- 
tional court. But a court is not 
sufficient. The function of courts is 
to render decisions. Courts are an 
important factor of government, 
local, state or national; but they are 
only a part of government. Inter- 
national control, to be efficient and 
successful, needs much more than the 
judicial organ of government. It 
needs all the organs of government. 



Internationalism can be realized 
only through a complete internation- 
al government, made up of and by all 
the component national governments. 

Our own federation of states, 
forming our interstate government, 
is the first federation in the history 
of the world that was ever really 
successful. It has attained its suc- 
cess because real authority and pow- 
er were given to the central govern- 
ment, which is composed of well de- 
fined organs, constituting a vital 
entity. We cannot expect to create 
a successful international federation 
without giving heed to the lessons 
of history, with particular attention 
to our own federation, the United 
States of America, the most conspic- 
uous object lesson, which has had a 
continuous existence since 1776, and 
is now stronger and more prosperous 
than ever. 

The basis of our success was our 
interstate constitution. This estab- 
lished our interstate government on 
a firm foundation. Our constitution 
was created and submitted by a con- 
stitutional convention composed of 
delegates from the different states. 

The first step toward an inter- 
national government, for the purpose 
of establishing peace and coopera- 
tion among constituent nations to 
replace war, suspicion and jealousy, 
and thus to conserve the fruits of 
national civilizations, is to call a con- 
vention to be composed of delegates 
from all nations willing to partici- 
pate, to consider this all important 
matter and possibly to submit a plan 
of international government to the 
participating nations. 

It is fitting that our government 
should initiate this movement by ex- 
tending an invitation to the nations 
of the world to send delegates to such 
a convention. The first tangible 
proposition of this kind known to the 



84 



Equity 



writer was made by the editor of 
this magazine in a paper submitted 
to our President, Secretary of State 
and numerous members of both 
houses of Congress, and afterwards 
(on December 20) published in sever- 
al newspapers. 

During the succeeding two months 
eight resolutions were introduced, 
four in the Senate and four in the 
House, proposing an international 
convention. The following is the full 
text of Senate Joint Resolution 219, 
introduced January 5th by Senator 
Owen: 

That the President of the United 
States is hereby requested to issue, 
immediately after the close of the 
present war in Europe, an invitation 
to the nations of the world to send 
delegates' to meet at The Hague, Hol- 
land, to propose a plan to their re- 
spective Governments for an inter- 
national arrangement to prevent fu- 
ture aggressive wars, with a provision 
for an international army and navy 
for the maintenance of peace and for 
the enforcement of the rules upon 
which international peace may be as- 
sured by such proposed arrangement. 

The other three Senate resolutions 
were introduced by Senators Shafrotb 
(Feb. 3), La Follette (Feb. 5) and 
Newlands (Feb. 19), numbers 233, 
234 and 242 respectively. The La Fol- 
lette resolution contemplates a con- 
ference of neutral nations to con- 
sider various international questions, 
as the establishment of peace among 
the warring nations, regulation of 
the manufacture and shipping of mu- 
nitions of war, the establishment of 
an international tribunal, etc. The 
Newlands resolution covers about 
four document pages, and consists 
largely of what might be called pre- 
amble matter, very eloquent and 
magnificent. It authorizes the Presi- 
dent to invite the neutral powers to 
a conference in Washington, D. C, as 
soon as practicable, to urge a discon- 



tinuance of hostilities, a withdrawal 
of the forces of each nation to with- 
in its own boundaries, the promotion 
of a peace conference, the establish- 
ment of an international court, tribu- 
nal or executive body with power, 
and to offer the good offices of this 
government to the warring powers 
for the restoration of peace. The 
Shafroth resolution is almost iden- 
tical with the Bartholdt House reso- 
lution; hence these two resolutions 
will be considered together below. 

Of the four House resolutions, 
three are so brief that the texts can 
be given here; the first was intro- 
duced January 2nd, by Congressman 
Curry, of California (House Joint 
Resolution 396): 

That the President be, and he is 
hereby, authorized and empowered to 
invite all nations to send accredited 
delegates to an international convene 
tion to frame a constitution for sub- 
mission to the nations for ratification, 
said constitution among other things 
to provide for an international legis- 
lature to enact laws for the govern- 
ment of the intercourse between na- 
tions; to provide for an international 
court to adjudicate the differences be- 
tween nations; to provide for the dis- 
armament of all nations; to provide 
for an international army and navy to 
be used as international police and 
when so ordered to enforce the de- 
crees of the international court; to 
provide that each nation shall be pro- 
tected in its right to retain and main- 
tain its own form of government and 
to exercise exclusive authority over 
its internal affairs; and to provide 
further that each nation shall only be 
permitted to maintain an army and 
navy sufficiently large to police its 
own territory. 

On January 12th the following (H. 
J. Res. 401) was introduced by Con- 
gressman Hensley, of Missouri: 

That the President of the United 
States is hereby requested to issue. 
immediately after the close of the 
present war in Europe, an invitation 
to the nations of the world to send 
delegates to meet at The Hague, Hoi- 



Editorial 



85 



land, to propose a plan to their re- 
spective Governments for an inter- 
national arrangement to prevent fu- 
ture aggressive wars, with a provision 
for an international army and navy 
for the maintenance of peace and for 
the enforcement of the rules' upon 
which international peace may be as- 
sured by such proposed arrangement. 

On January 26th the following 
(House Concurrent Resolution 59) 
was introduced by Congressman Git- 
tins, of New York: 

That the President of the United 
States be, and he is* hereby, requested 
to invite all the nations of the world, 
to send delegates' to a meeting, to be 
held at Niagara Falls, New York, on 
or soon after March twenty-fourth, 
nineteen hundred and fifteen, and to 
which meeting the President is hereby 
authorized to appoint three delegates 
to represent this Government. 

The object of the meeting shall be 
the consideration and formation of a 
league of nations' which, in conjunc- 
tion with The Hague conventions, 
shall endeavor to arrange a binding 
and enforceable agreement among all 
nations looking toward the prevention 
of future wars and the maintenance 
of universal peace, more especially 
through the^ compulsory arbitration of 
all international disputes and through 
the contribution by each nation, in due 
proportion, to a Hague guarantee 
fund. Such fund shall be controlled 
and administered by The Hague tribu- 
nal, thereby giving it effective powers 
to enforce its decrees and thus render 
future wars impossible. 

On January 19th, Congressman 
Bartholdt of Missouri, introduced H. 
J. Res. 405, which is by far the most 
elaborate and important of these 
eight documents, the Shafroth Sen- 
ate resolution, introduced two weeks 
later, evidently being based upon it, 
the two documents being very simi- 
lar; and for this reason these two 
will be considered together. 

It is well to note here that Messrs. 
Gittins and Bartholdt were not re- 
elected, hence they will not be in the 
next House to continue this good 
work. Messrs. Hensley and Curry 



were reelected, so they and all the 
senators mentioned can continue this 
work in the next Congress if our 
Government should not act in this di- 
rection before the next session. 

The Bartholdt-Shafroth document 
provides "for world organization 
to secure permanent international 
peace." It is too long and elaborate 
to reproduce here. It does not ask 
the President to call an international 
convention, but instead it requests 
him "to initiate negotiations, through 
the usual diplomatic channels, look- 
ing to the establishment of a system 
of international control" based upon 
the principles of a tentative draft 
of an international constitution there 
given. This draft is almost as ela- 
borate as the one given in October, 
1914, Equity. 

The numbers of all these docu- 
ments are here carefully given to 
facilitate sending for them by those 
interested. Address House or Senate 
Document Room, Washington. 

The first object is not to decide 
what the international constitution 
shall contain, but to call a conven- 
tion, the duty of which body shall be 
to fully discuss and submit an inter- 
national constitution to the partici- 
pating nations. The inhuman mur- 
ders almost countless in number, the 
destruction of property on an unpre- 
cedented scale, the indescribable re- 
version to barbarism now in progress 
in Europe cry aloud for some civiliz- 
ed method of coordinating the na- 
tions into orderly and rational con- 
duct. 

The civilization of any nation is 
too precious to expose to wanton 
destruction. Under the protecting 
wing of an international government 
every participating nation would be 
absolutely safe and free to work out a 
peaceful destiny. It would be re- 
strained only in regard to a warlike 



86 



Equity 



destiny. In some such plan is the 
only hope for "The New Freedom" 
of nations. Under this protection, 
Germany can become more German, 
Servia more Servian, etc., or the var- 
ious protected nations may admit 
more of their neighbors' customs, in- 
fluences, etc.; and they can do either 
with perfect safety. And wars with 
their killing, maiming and innumer- 
able other horrors will become only 
memories of a barbarous age; and in 
future years, cannon and other war 
machinery will be kept as curiosities 
in museums, beside the instruments 
of torture of the dark ages. 

But let us not congratulate our- 
selves too soon. The cannon are now 
roaring, men are falling by thousands 
in their own blood, widows and 
orphans are being driven from their 
homes with no prospects for neces- 
sities, decency or safety in war-torn 
countries. The stress is on. The 
world has never before seen the like. 
If this does not stir men of thought 
and men of deeds to a more rational 
world civilization, nothing ever will, 
and we might as well declare civiliza- 
tion to be a horrible failure. Its 
present basis is now crumbling so 
rapidly that unless a better basis is 
found it will end in universal dis- 
aster. The extention of world organ- 
ization to include co-operation among 
civilized governments through an in- 
ternational government is the most 
important and pressing problem now 
facing humanity. The future of hu- 
manity must be insured against such 
conflagrations as is now in progress 
in Europe. Intelligent co-operation 
is the only safety. 

The first step is the calling of a 
representative international conven- 
tion. Our government is the proper 
agency to do it. It is to be hoped 
that our good President and his 
cabinet are considering this im- 
portant subject, and that our Govern- 



ment will act when the time seems 
most opportune. We are in daily 
danger of 'becoming involved with 
one or more of the belligerent na- 
tions. It may be considered that the 
initiation of the above at present 
might increase our danger or lead to 
embarrassment. Whatever may be the 
cause of the present delay, we feel 
that this step cannot be much longer 
deferred. 

The issuing of such an invitation 
by our Government would attract 
immediate and world-wide attention, 
and would advertise the idea more in 
a week than the most persistent 
propaganda work could in ten years. 
Even tho the first convention should 
be unsuccessful, it would certainly 
lead to another, and the intelligence 
of the 20th century would certainly 
find a way to at least begin the world 
organization of the race for peace. 
Every interest demands it. The world 
of finance wants conservation and 
safe cooperation. Christianity, Cath- 
olic and Protestant, is ashamed of 
this colossal crime nineteen centuries 
after Christ. The sacred cause of 
religion, of whatever name or form, 
hides its sad face. Intelligence is 
vexed at the stupidity of it all. Pity 
is aghast at the indescribable hor- 
rors. Sanity doubts itself. Common 
sense seems to have deserted human- 
ity. Has Christ failed? Has God 
forgotten the world? 

The representatives of the leading 
nations must meet face to face and 
organize an international govern- 
ment, with international (super- 
national) authority and power. Fair 
France need not fear it, for she will 
be an influential part of it, and un- 
der it she can prosper in peace and 
safety. The same can be said of 
Austria, England, Russia, Germany, 
etc. 

The first step is an international 
convention. Let it be called. 



Editorial 



87 



Freedom for Philadelphia 



The 240,000 voters of the nation's 
third city in population and indus- 
trial prowess are in for another cost- 
ly lesson concerning the elementary 
principles of self government. 

This lesson has to do with the al- 
most universal opinion of the peo- 
ple of Philadelphia that they need 
improved transit facilities between 
centers and suburbs. The opinion 
was recently crystalized into an elab- 
orate plan by the progressive admin- 
istration of Mayor Blankenburg and 
the practically unanimous support of 
the community was given to it. All 
the important business bodies, the 
civic betterment and reform groups, 
the labor forces and the newspapers 
were committed to the plan, which re- 
quired only the action of the city 
councils to legalize the necessary 
borrowing of $30,000,000 with which 
to do the work. Only the Republi- 
can machine boss and his henchmen 
remained cold to the project. 

But right there the lesson was be- 
gun. The "cohesive power of public 
plunder" was at work. The Mc- 
Nichol "combine" wished to put off 
the handling of so large an appropri- 
ation for public works until after the 
next mayoralty election, when the 
"machine" confidently expects to 
have its puppet in the mayor's chair. 
Accordingly the city councils, under 
orders from the "boss," refused to 
authorize the necessary loan. 

Public meetings were held by the 
voters all over the city and several 
general town meetings were held to 
protest against this flagrant disre- 
gard of public opinion by the city 
councils. The newspapers joined in 
the attack, and intense feeling was 
aroused against the stubborn agents 
of the "contractor combine." Final- 
ly the councils did throw a sop to 
the enraged public, in the form of 



the ridiculously inadequate authoriza- 
tion of a $6,000,000 loan for transit 
improvements. To their surprise, the 
Mayor accepted this and a halting 
start was made with the certain 
prospect of endless delays and the 
ultimate extravagant use of public 
funds in case the machine returns to 
official power in the City Hall. 

The one ray of sunshine across the 
dark background of this picture is 
the certainty that a larger number 
of the intelligent citizens of Philadel- 
phia than ever before are awake to 
the situation and aroused to action 
along lines of common interest. A 
larger number have begun to sense 
the absurdity of their position. They 
are asking these questions: 

Why should not we, the sovereign 
people, have some method of enforc- 
ing our will regarding this vital is- 
sue? 

Why should not we, the voters of 
this city, have some means of con- 
trolling the action of our elected 
representatives? jWhy should we not 
adopt an orderly process by which 
a majority may veto their acts that 
do not suit us? 

Then, if councilmen still remain un- 
responsive, why should not we, the 
"sovereign people" of this city, pos- 
ses an orderly process for exercising 
our undoubted right to "un-elect" the 
officials who have proved themselves 
unfaithful to us, their employers? 

These are the instruments the peo- 
ple of this great city are learning to 
feel the need of, learning by painful 
and costly experience — namely, the 
Initiative and Referendum processes 
for expressing and enforcing their 
will concerning particular measures, 
and the Recall process for dismissing 
incompetent or dishonest officials. 
// the people are to rule their own house- 
hold they must have the use of these in- 
struments. 

Along with this vision, the people 



88 



Equity 



are getting ready to revise their ob- 
solete form of city government. A 
sturdy movement is already launched 
in Philadelphia looking to the small 
one-chambered council and respon-i 
sible executive, elected on the Short 
Ballot. Such a city government 
would possess the highest efficiency 
through unity of action and yet re- 
main democratic if it had, along with 
that, the instruments of direct con- 
trol by the voters. Let the word go 
forth to this effect and the people 
of Philadelphia will have learned 
their lesson. Speed the day when 
this splendid city, known the world 
over as the "cradle of liberty," may 
no longer be scorned as the city of 
the "corrupt and contented." 



"Spineless" Legislatures 

This is one of the latest and most 
approved objections advanced by 
prominent opponents of the Initiative 
and Referendum — namely, that the 
existence of these powers of popular 
control will cause our elected legis- 
lators to be "spineless." This is the 
string on which Messrs. Taft, Lodge 
and their followers are continually 
harping. 

They will tell you, as if it were the 
final and unanswerable objection to 
direct control of the representatives 
by the represented, that it will take 
all the back-bone out of our lawmak- 
ers and leave them incapable of con- 
structive statesmanship. The infer- 
ence would be that constructive 
statesmanship has been a very com- 
mon asset of our state governments 
in the past, but with that we will 
not concern ourselves at the moment 
except to say that if one indulged in 
a smile it would be excusable. 

Now just what do these great men 
mean by this? What does it really 
amount to? Is it that they admire 
men of strong character and want 
such men to make the laws? Well, 



who will dissent from that? Certain- 
ly not we who believe in letting the 
will of the people find expression. 

But this professed fear of making 
legislators weak, on the part of our 
distinguished opponents, leaves quite 
untouched the vital question as to 
what is the purpose or effect of the 
acts of said legislators. When Mes- 
srs. Taft, Lodge, et al, get up in 
meeting to assert that the power of 
the voters to control the legislators 
makes the latter "spineless," some of 
the hearers want to know in what re- 
spect, as to what cause or interest 
these legislators are so weak; also 
if they have been strong under exist- 
ing conditions and to what end. 

There is a quite general impression 
abroad in the land that most of our 
legislatures in the past have been 
strong for the special privilege cor- 
porations and weak in conserving the 
interests and rights of the people. 
It is because of this known weakness 
of our representatives in the face of 
tejnptations to favor the powerful 
interests, that we have come to feel 
the need of these instruments of di- 
rect control in the hands of the vot- 
ers. It is we who have deplored the 
"spinelessness" of legislatures, and 
it is we who would now put moral 
back-bone into them by causing them 
to know, first and last, that they are 
in fact as well as in profession, the 
servants of the people. 

The only possible meaning to be 
got from the Taft-Lodge fear of 
"spineless" legislatures is that they 
fear the advent of men who will re- 
spect the people's will and will re- 
sist the blandishments of "the pow- 
ers that prey." 

From the viewpoint of the people's 
interest the past legislatures have 
been the "spineless" ones. What the 
Initiative and Referendum in prac- 
tise tend to produce is legislatures 
with moral back-bone and the desire 



Editorial 



89 



to ascertain and express the senti- 
ment of the electorate. jWill Messrs. 
Taft, Lodge, et al, please take notice ? 



Wilson Wants Word From His Boss 

Yes, we refer to Mr. Woodrow Wil- 
son, the President of the United 
States. And it isn't Use majeste, 
either, to intimate that he has a 
"boss." He admits it, himself. In 
fact, he asserts it, in the course of 
his official message to Congress, ve- 
toing the immigration bill literacy 
test (Jan. 28). After pointing out 
his objections, one because the bill 
departs from the policy of this coun- 
try to give right of asylum to polit- 
ical refugees, and the other because 
it would exclude immigrants for lack 
of education regardless of character 
or capacity, the President wrote as 
follows: 

"If the people of this country have 
made up their minds to limit the num- 
ber of immigrants by arbitrary tests 
and so reverse the policy of all the 
generations of Americans that have 
gone before them, it is their right to 
do so. I am their servant and have 
n® license to stand in their way. But 
I do not believe that they have. I re- 
spectfully Submit that no one can 
quote their mandate to that effect. 

"Has any political party ever avow- 
ed a policy of restriction in this fun- 
damental matter, gone to the country 
on it and been commissioned to control 
its legislation? Does this bill rest 
upon the conscious and universal as- 
sent and desire of the American peo- 
ple? I doubt it. It is because I doubt 
it that I make bold to dissent from it. 
I am willing to abide by the verdict, 
but not until it has been rendered. Let 
the platforms of parties speak out up- 
on this policy and the people pro- 
nounce their wish. The matter is too 
fundamental to be settled otherwise. 

"I have no pride of opinion on this 
question. I am not foolish enough to 
profess to know the wishes and ideals 
of America better than the body of her 
chosen representatives know them. I 
only want instruction direct from 
those whose fortunes with ours and all 
men's are involved." 



Thus does the President recognize 
that, as the "servant" of the people, 
he wants instruction from them di- 
rect, as his only master. "If the 
people have made up their minds" to 
do this thing, he will not stand in 
their way, but he "does not believe" 
they have and defies anyone to quote 
their "mandate to that effect." 

The President is perfectly safe in 
that stand, for as everyone knows, 
there is no process for ascertaining 
the majority opinion or will of the 
voters of the nation on this or any 
other question. In spite of this the 
President asks if the bill rests "on 
the conscious and universal assent 
and desire of the American people" 
and speaks of being willing "to abide 
by the verdict." He urges the party 
platforms to speak out on this ques- 
tion, so that "the people may pro- 
nounce their wish." 

But how is a voter to express his 
preference on this question, when a 
score of other important policies are 
embodied in two or three rival party 
platforms? The fact of our political 
history is that the people have paid 
less and less attention to party plat- 
forms, and no one knows this better 
than President Wilson. Because of 
this impossibility of voting their 
opinions on any policy by itself, the 
voters have tended to vote for party 
names and obey party bosses slavish- 
ly. 

Now is there any good and sound 
reason why the will of the peoplo, 
en this matter of the immigrant liter- 
acy test, or any other important 
question, should not be ascertainable ? 
The process for doing that thing has 
proved its practicability in Switzer- 
land and in a number of States of 
this nation. A similar method for 
effecting a national Referendum in 
this country is entirely feasible. 

Take the present case, for instance. 
The opportunity might be given by 



90 



Equity 



having this proposition printed on 
the ballots at the next congressional 
election, thus: "Do you favor the literacy 
test in the immigration bill passed by Con- 
gress and vetoed by the President?" On 
the ballot the main points of 
the bill would be clearly stated. 

To this the voter could indicate his 
"yes" or "no" by the marking of a 
cross. Of course certain publicity 
rules would need to be laid down by 
Congress and proper provision made 
for enabling the voters to indicate a 
strong desire to have any question 
submitted. The details of submission 
could be easily worked out. The prin- 
ciple is the same as in a State or 
municipal Referendum. 

Let the President himself, with 
his avowed desire to know the will 
of the people, propose legislation to 
this purpose, and all right thinking 
citizens who believe in genuine dem- 
ocracy will applaud him and stand 
by him. 



A Quantitative Comparison 

It is customary for hasty critics of 
the Initiative and Referendum to as- 
sert that these direct processes of 
enacting laws are dangerous and in- 
efficient because of the "large num- 
ber" of measures which from time 
to time are placed upon the ballot 
in different states. These critics 
take the ground that it is unreason- 
able to expect the mass of voters to 
deal intelligently with so large a 
number of measures, some of which 
may deal with quite intricate or 
technical subjects, at a single elec- 
tion. 

This criticism doubtless deserves 
some careful examination at the 
hands of those who stand for the 
Initiative and Referendum as nec- 
essary instruments of efficient and 



democratic control of government. 
The case of California is the one now 
most frequently referred to as the 
horrible example of this: supposed 
evil. In that state last year the 
highest number of measures as yet 
submitted at one election in any 
state was on the ballot, namely, 48. 
It should be remembered, in connec- 
tion with this election, that 27 of 
the 48 measures on the California 
ballot were placed there by the legis- 
lature, and should therefore not be 
credited to the Initiative or the Ref- 
erendum. At the same election there 
were 29 measures on the ballot in 
Oregon, 19 in Arizona, 16 in Colorado 
and 15 in Missouri. It might be 
noted in passing that in several 
states not having the Initiative and 
Referendum a relatively high number 
of measures (constitutional amend- 
ments) were submitted by the legis- 
latures, as for instance 17 in Louis- 
iana, 11 in Minnesota, 10 in South 
Carolina and 10 in Wisconsin. 

Taking California, however, for 
purposes of comparison, let us ask 
the question, whether it was more 
unreasonable to expect an intelligent 
decision by the voters of that state 
on the 48 measures submitted to 
them, after a period of many months 
of opportunity for consideration 
through the presentation of both 
sides of every question in a publicity 
pamphlet sent to every voter, and 
with all of these questions constant- 
ly under discussion in the newspa- 
pers and in public meetings, than to 
expect an equally intelligent action 
on the 1600 or more measures intro- 
duced in the first 60 days of the 
Pennsylvania legislative session? A 
similar comparison might be made 
with the record of measures introduc- 
ed in New Jersey, where the total at 
this writing has reached 1192; or in 
New York, where it has reached a 



Editorial 



91 



total of 2810. In all three of these 
states the numbers quoted are likely 
to be considerably higher before the 
session ends. 

As a matter of fact, we know that 
the individual members of the legis- 
latures do not even pretend to read 
all or one-fourth of the measures in- 
troduced. The result is that a major- 
ity of them are either not considered 
at all or depend for their decision 
upon the personal opinion of the 
chairmen of the committees to which 
the measures arte referred. And 
when a measure is favorably report- 
ed by a committee, the voting thereon 
is very generally directed by the dif- 
ferent party organization leaders. In 
exceptional cases it may happen that 
measures of the greatest importance 
are carefully read by a majority 
of the members, but this certainly is 
not the rule, for in most cases no 
opportunity is given for real deliber- 
ation. 

The result of this method is an 
enormous legislative output by our 
various lawmaking bodies. It is our 
purpose to keep watch on the output 
of the 1915 legislatures, and in a 
later number to publish the official 
record of measures introduced, and 
measures passed. The New York 
State Library has made a tabulation 
of laws and resolutions passed by the 
various legislatures from 1909 to 
1913, with the exception of Utah, 
showing a total output of 62,643 
measures in that period. 

As compared with these figures, 
the measures voted on through the 
initiative and referendum process 
are insignificant in number; and 
when we consider the length of time 
during which initiated or referred 
measures are open for comment and 
discussion by all the voters intelli- 
gent enough to take an interest in 
them, and the conditions under which 



these measures are submitted, it be- 
comes perfectly apparent that the 
comparison as to quantity as well 
as to quality is very markedly in 
favor of the direct process. 

The I. and R. does not mean "more 
laws," as so often asserted, but few- 
er laws and better ones. 



"Inelasticity" of the Initiative 

One of the arguments that has 
been frequently used with consider- 
able effect against the Initiative and 
Referendum is that this process of 
legislation is inelastic. By this the 
people who distrust instruments of 
popular government mean that they 
offer no means for the amendment 
of a proposition, once it has obtained 
the requisite number of signatures 
of voters to place it upon the ballot. 
They argue that this is a serious 
legislative defect, and point out that 
in representative legislatures defective 
measures are very frequently amend- 
ed and changed during or after com- 
mittee consideration so as to make 
them good measures. 

But there is another side to this 
argument which clearly outweighs 
the danger or disadvantage thus sug- 
gested and we find a striking illus- 
tration of this other side of the ques- 
tion in the action of the recent ses- 
sion of the legislature of Utah. 

As long ago as 1900, the voters of 
Utah ratified an amendment to their 
constitution authorizing the Initiative 
and Referendum. But this left the 
operation of those powers for the 
legislature to provide. Up to this 
year no legislature had responded to 
the formally declared will of the peo- 
ple. At this year's session, an act 
providing for the operation of the 
Initiative and Referendum was in- 
troduced in the House by Mr. Shields 
and eventually passed both houses. 



92 



Equity 



As introduced, this bill was a very 
fair one. 

But it was subjected to a number 
of amendments before final passage. 
These amendments have made it 
practically worthless to the people of 
Utah. We will show in a moment 
what the amendments were, but 
would first like to express the opinion 
that the amendment of legislative 
bills contains more elements of dan- 
ger than does the impossibility of 
amending initiative measures. Rich- 
ard W. Montague, in his National 
Municipal Review article on "The 
Oregon System at Work" (volume 
3, page 256-283), asserts that "in all 
that pertains to the technique of 
draftsmanship, legislation passed un- 
der the Initiative is markedly super- 
ior to the average of the statutes 
passed by the legislature." It is 
argued that the men who frame a bill 
scrutinize their work closely, know- 
ing that their measure "once launch- 
ed must go as it is, for better or 
worse." As a matter of fact, initiat- 
ed measures have generally been the 
result of long and careful consider- 
ation by a number of experienced 
lawyers and others. In any state 
where a legislative reference bureau 
exists, its advice is at the disposal 
of initiators as well as of the legis- 
lature. It can be provided by law 
that all such measures shall have 
technical supervision by experts and 
the legislative bureau may be speci- 
fied. As in the Massachusetts plan, it 
may be required that initiated meas- 
ures be first passed upon by the 
Supreme Court of the State as to 
their constitutionality before they 
can go on the ballot. Also on that 
plan, provision could be made for en- 
abling the legislature to make 
amendments subject to the approval 
of the sponsors of a proposed law. 



In these ways the Initiative process 
can be made more elastic. 

Now as to the Shields bill and its 
amendments. As introduced this bill 
was a fairly good one. It would 
have proved workable, judging from 
the experience of other states. It 
made the Initiative or the Referen- 
dum operative on petitions signed by 
8 per cent of the votes cast for gov- 
ernor at the last preceding election, 
the Referendum being applicable to 
any measure except those passed by 
a two-thirds vote. But an amend- 
ment provides that "at least a major- 
ity of the counties of the state must 
be represented upon said petition by 
not less than 12 per cent of the entire 
vote cast in such counties for all the 
candidates for the office of governor 
at the preceding election." 

It has been shown repeatedly by 
experience that the requirement that 
the petition signatures must be ob- 
tained in a majority of the counties 
of a state makes the procedure ex- 
pensive and exceedingly difficult of 
operation. 

Again, the bill in its original form 
provides for the circulation of peti- 
tions in the manner which is custom- 
ary in other states having the Ini- 
tiative and Referendum, with some 
very good provisions for the safe- 
guarding of said petitions, the exact 
form of the blanks being prescribed 
with suitable warning as to their 
proper use and a declaration being 
made to the effect that "it is a felony 
for anyone to sign any initiative or 
referendum petition with any other 
name than his own or to knowingly 
sign his name more than once to the 
same measure, or to sign such peti- 
tion when he knows he is not a legal 
voter." A commendable feature is 
the provision for a $500 fine or two 
years' imprisonment, or both, for 
anyone convicted of signing his name 



Editorial 



93 



to a petition more than once or for 
signing when he is not a legal voter; 
also a similar penalty for any officer 
or person who violates any provision 
of the law. Also provision is made 
for a sworn statement by the circula- 
tor of petitions to the effect that the 
names thereon were signed in his 
presence and by the persons living at 
the address given. 

But in spite of all of this, an 
amendment was inserted to the ef- 
fect that "every sheet of said peti- 
tion shall be signed by the citizens 
and legal voters of the state in the 
office of and in the presence of some 
officer duly authorized to administer 
oaths." The italics are ours, and 
emphasize what is generally under- 
stood to be a very unnecessary and 
severe requirement for the operation 
of this legislative instrument. Many 
voters who are of necessity working 
long hours are unable to take the 
time to go in person to sign a peti- 
tion in the office of and in the pres- 
ence of an official. There is nothing 
in the experience of other states with 
these instruments to justify any such 
requirement. It must always be re- 
membered that the signing of these 
petitions serves only to cause the 
submission of a measure, provided 
the required total of signers is ob- 
tained, and does not mean the enact- 
ment of a measure. On the submis- 
sion of a measure, all of the usual 
machinery of elections is employed, 
so that there is no possibility of any 
measure being enacted without prop- 
er protection of the electorate in the 
exercise of its inherent rights. 

A curious feature of the law, as 
finally amended, is an inconsistency 
in the wording, due to carelessness 
on the part of the amenders. Not- 
withstanding that they changed the 
process of signing so as to make it 
necessary for all petitions to be 



signed in the office of and in the pres- 
ence of an officer, under oath, other 
sections of the bill still speak of 
"circulation sheets" and refer in sev- 
eral places to the process of "circu- 
lation" of petitions in a way that in- 
dicates the original intention of the 
bill. This discrepancy in the wording 
may lead to an appeal to the courts 
later on. 

In connection with the referendum 
feature of this law, it is provided 
that a referendum petition shall be 
filed "within six months next after 
the adjournment of the legislature," 
but nothing is said to indicate that 
the operation of laws shall be delayed 
for the usual three months pending 
a possible Referendum. It seems that 
any law against which a Referendum 
shall be filed within the six months 
mentioned, shall be in operation all 
the time unless repealed at the next 
election. This plan makes every 
law an emergency law, in that no law 
can be held up pending a referendum 
vote. This makes the Referendum 
virtually a repeal of legislative acts, 
rather than a people's veto. 

Legislatures are jealous of their 
power. They do not wish the people 
to reserve powers of direct control. 
This is illustrated by the fact that 
no legislature in Utah from 1900 un- 
til the present time would put into 
operation the I. and R. amendment 
made to the constitution in 1900. 
Since then, in other states, I. and R. 
amendments have been made self- 
enacting, to place them beyond legis- 
lative indifference and procrastina- 
tion. The present legislature has 
deigned to do what the people in- 
tended should be done soon after 
1900, and which they would have 
done themselves if they had then 
known law. A fairly good bill was 
prepared and presented, and here we 
see what evil can come from amend- 



94 



Equity 



ing. The opportunity for offering 
amendments is a powerful weapon 
for mischievous enemies to possess, 
as is shown above. The fact that 
initiative measures are very carefully 
prepared before presentation to the 
voters, and then are beyond the reach 
of the mischievous amender, is a 
strong argument for the Initiative. 



RAILROADS AND THE PEOPLE 



Significance of the Appeal Now Be- 
ing Made to the Pennsylvania and 
New Jersey Voters for the 
Repeal of Full Crew Laws 

Aroused at last by the recent ex- 
perience of Missouri and other 
States, where radical labor legisla- 
tion has been defeated at the polls, 
the 21 railroads operating in Penn- 
sylvania and New Jersey have 
thrown themselves on the public of 
those states in a very elaborate pub- 
licity campaign with the frankly 
avowed object of causing the legis- 
latures at Harrisburg and Trenton 
to repeal the Full Crew laws in force 
in those states. 

In a long signed statement for the 
press, the railroad presidents con- 
fessed that railroad managers form- 
erly had maintained "a stupid and 
stubborn attitude of mind," but they 
added that these managers had now 
reached "a more enlightened state of 
mind." They said they were now 
ready not only to listen to the pub- 
lic, but to trust the people "to decide 
upon the merits of any proposition 
in which the public is a third party." 
The railroad managers, after stating 
their side of the Full Crew law con- 
troversy, go on to cite the experience 
of Missouri in the last election, when, 
under the operation of the Referen- 
dum, the voters vetoed, 2 to 1, the 
Full Crew law enacted by the Mis- 
souri legislature. 



Still further, the railroad managers 
in this statement say that "the 
methods by which the public can im- 
pose its will in Pennsylvania and 
New Jersey are not immediately 
final, as was the Referendum vote 
taken last year in Missouri." They 
nevertheless propose to appeal to the 
public, and say that they believe the 
public will decide what is right and 
that "the ground swell of expressed 
opinion from the people of these 
states will be acquiesced in by their 
elected representatives at Harrisburg 
and Trenton." 

This is all very well and is un- 
questionably a step forward on the 
part of the railroad managers. It is 
recognized by these great and power- 
ful interests that the people as a 
whole are less likely to enact unjust 
or foolish laws affecting business or 
any other interest than are the legis- 
latures elected under existing polit- 
ical conditions. 

However, every thoughtful observ- 
er of this phenomenon and every 
thoughtful legislator will be con- 
fronted by the following question: 
How is the state of Pennsylvania or 
the state of New Jersey to know 
whether the proposed repeal of the 
Full Crew law will have obtained a 
"ground swell" of favorable opinion 
or not? What means have we for 
measuring the opinion of the voters 
in these states on this question, one 
way or the other? It appears alto- 
gether probable that by means of the 
very elaborate and costly campaign 
which the railroads are making that 
the legislatures in these states may 
be moved to repeal the Full Crew 
law. Of the merits or demerits of 
that law we are not here speaking. 
Suppose it shall be repealed, what 
evidence shall we have that such re- 
peal is based upon an actual majority 
of the electorate? None whatever. 
And is it not clear to any unprej- 



Editorial 



95 



udiced mind that in the long run 
any governmental policy will have 
more stability and be moi*e truly 
representative of the will of the peo- 
ple if an orderly and legal process 
is provided for ascertaining that 
will? 

The present attitude of the rail- 
roads on this particular question goes 
far to illustrate to every candid mind 
the need of processes that will enable 
the people to retain final control over 
their own affairs. 



HOW TO SET CONGRESS FREE 



The National Voters' League Opens 
Campaign for Needed Reform in 
the Rules of the House — Sug- 
gestions For Senate, Too. 

That fully 400 of the 435 members 
of the National House of Representa- 
tives are mere figure-heads by virtue 
of an undemocratic pie-and-pork, bi- 
partizan clique of party leaders, is 
the assertion, now seriously made by 
Lynn Haines, as Executive Secretary 
of the National Voters' League, in 
Bulletin No. 5, issued since the ad- 
journment of the 63d Congress. But 
Mr. Haines does not content himself 
with merely reminding the public of 
an established and flagrant evil in 
the very heart of our system of rep- 
resentative government. He goes 
much further by indicating very 
clearly how this evil may be remov- 
ed. In explanation of the existing 
system, Mr. Haines says: 

An average of 140 new Congressmen 
are elected every two years. These 
new members are at once the chief 
victims, and, unconsciously, the cause 
of the continuance of the system 
which makes them dummies. The ma- 
chine is kept intact Congress after 
Congress because the newly-elected 
members are completely excluded from 
participation in its reorganization. 
They come to Washington in ignor- 
ance of parliamentary conditions, and 
when information comes to them it is 
then too late even to protest. Once 



the old rules are readopted, all inde- 
pendent members are helpless. 

The bulletin goes on to give a re- 
cent instance of how legislation is 
"railroaded." Such was the passage 
of the ship purchase bill under a 
special rule requiring immediate con- 
sideration and permitting no change 
in the bill, which was passed after a 
perfunctory debate limited to six 
hours. It is declared that there is 
"no such thing as regular, orderly, 
routine procedure," and that "the 
machine that dominated the House in 
the 63d Congress was worse in every 
respect than Cannonism." 

Reassembling the Machine 

How this all-powerful legislative 
machine is reconstructed from one 
Congress to another is explained by 
Mr. Haines, as follows: 

There are three stages in the recon- 
struction, or continuation, of the 
House machine. First, the re-elected 
leaders, quietly and under cover, par- 
cel out coveted committee places and 
complete almost to the last detail the 
work of reorganization. This is done 
soon after the Congressional elections 
and weeks before the new members 
appear on the scene. This initial 
manipulation is unauthorized and un- 
official. It is so far removed from an 
official organization that the distance 
must be divided by still another un- 
official, but slightly more public, pro- 
ceeding. This is called the majority 
party caucus. Because the real organ- 
izing already done must be ratified, 
the leaders arrange for an organiza- 
tion caucus. This is the second step. 

Then, on the opening day of the new 
Congress, the old rules are readopted 
and the unofficial, unauthorized work 
of the reorganizers has been made of- 
ficial. When that is done it means 
another boss-controlled Congress. 

Mr. Haines says that the first and 
second of these steps have already 
been taken for the 64th Congress. On 
February 4, 1915, the caucus of the 
majority party in secret selected 
Kitchin of North Carolina, as the 
next Ways and Means committee 
chairman and floor leader, contin- 
ued Clark in the speakership and ap- 



96 



Equity 



pointed the Committee on Commit- 
tees, to which is delegated the nam- 
ing of the committees of the next 
house, and the choice of Saunders of 
Virginia, as caucus chairman. 

But this secret party action must 
yet be made official through the re- 
adoption of the old rules on the first 
day of the next Congress, after 
which the majority clique will be in 
absolute control of the nation's law- 
making machinery without let or 
hindrance for two years more. 
How to Throw Off The Yoke 

This being the situation, what way 
is there to change it? The question 
is answered by Mr. Haines with the 
proposal of what he calls a "gateway" 
amendment to the rules, that is, a 
workable method of making changes. 
The National Voters' League is pre- 
paring a complete program of rules 
reform for the restoration of demo- 
cratic procedure. But the all-impor- 
tant next step is to educate the pub- 
lic to the truth of the present deplor- 
able situation and so to induce the 
newly elected members to vote for 
the gateway amendment on the first 
day of the next session. 

Some of the more important rules 
changes proposed by the Voters' 
League are the following: 

First, to reduce the number of 
committees and so to group their 
functions as to equalize their re- 
spective importance. 

Second, to authorize each commit- 
tee to select its own chairman and 
choose its own employees. 

Third, to forbid the holding of 
secret, or executive, sessions by any 
committee and requiring that a record 
of all committee proceedings be kept; 
also a calendar of committee busi- 
ness. 

Fourth, all committees to be re- 
quired to report back to the House 
within a reasonable time all matters 
referred to them. 



Fifth, the adoption of some re- 
sponsible budget system for carrying 
on the affairs of the government. 

Sixth, to do away with the irre- 
sponsible "committee of the whole," 
where record votes are dodged. 

Seventh, the adoption of a quick, 
electrical system of voting, to save 
valuable time of the House. 

The object of the National Voters' 
League is to furnish information to 
members of Congress and to the 
public as to the status of legislation 
in Congress, to supply voters any- 
where with the records of Congress- 
men and to publish a special record 
of the work done by each Congress. 
The Executive Committee of the 
league is composed as follows: 

Herbert S. Bigelow, Cincinnati; Mrs. 
Alice G. Brandeis, Boston; Mrs. Eliza- 
beth G. Evans, Boston; Mrs. Borden 
Harriman, New York; Frederic C. 
Howe, New York; Charles' H. Inger- 
soll, South Orange, N. J.; Fred S. Jack- 
son, Topeka; Stiles P. Jones, Minneapo- 
lis; Herbert Quick, Berkeley Springs, 
W. Va.; Lieut. C. P. Shaw. Norfolk, 
Va.; John F. Sinclair, St. Paul; Miss 
Ida M. Tarbell, New York; William S. 
U'ren, Oregon City, Oregon. 

The headquarters of this league is 
at 831 Woodward Building, Washing- 
ton, D. C. 

***** 

Two Other Suggestions 
While the editors of Equity are in 
entire sympathy with the main fea- 
tures of this program for improving 
and democratizing the procedure of 
the lower house of Congress, there 
are two matters of the utmost im- 
portance which are not included 
therein. 

One of these has to do with the 
fundamental question of enabling 
this great legislative body to be at 
all times its own master. The pro- 
posal of the Voters' League for a 
gateway amendment to the existing 
rules is, of course, a step in this di- 
rection, in making it possible for the 



Editorial 



97 



House at any time to decide on a 
proposed amendment to the rules. 

But this is not all that is needed. 
In our opinion a rule should be adopt- 
ed that whenever 10 per cent, of the 
members of the House shall have 
signed a formal demand to the proper 
authority for the consideration of 
any measure that has been referred 
to a committee, such measure shall 
be presented by the committee for 
the consideration of the House. This 
would make it impossible for any 
committee to become the tomb of a 
measure introduced by any member 
of Congress, provided that a tenth of 
the membership was sufficiently in- 
terested in it to desire its considera- 
tion. Let no one understand this 
suggestion to imply that the adoption 
or rejection of any measure is to be 
made by a minority vote, but merely 
that a tenth of the membership may 
compel the consideration of any 
measure. Not only would this pre- 
vent the pigeon-holing of measures 
referred to committees, but it would 
also prevent a small ruling clique of 
powerful officials or party leaders 
from exercising arbitrary control 
over the proceedings of the House. 

Another plan which we would lik^ 
to suggest, looking toward greater 
efficiency in the work of Congress, is 
the creation of what might be called 
a co-ordinating committee, consisting 
of three members elected from and 
by both the Senate and House in such 
manner as to best secure a fair rep- 
resentation of different factions, and 
one member to be appointed by the 
United States Supreme Court, but 
who shall not be a member of either 
house, but permissibly may be one 
of the members of the Court. This 
co-ordinating committee should havt 
the power and the duty of seeing that 
no action of one body shall fail to 
obtain the consideration of the other. 
Thus would be avoided the situation 



so wasteful and disconcerting in all 
of our two-chambered legislative 
bodies, that of having the act of one 
house rendered futile and ineffective 
because of the nonconcurrence or 
failure to consider by the other 
house. This failure to consider is 
sometimes due to a technical rule 01 
regulation, but more often is the out- 
come of various political or factional 
influences seeking to side-track or 
pigeon-hole a certain measure, and 
often for no good reason at all but 
just for lack of a proper means of co- 
ordinating the acts and intentions of 
the two houses. The proposed com- 
mittee would have authority over the 
sequence or order of consideration 
and voting upon all bills in both 
houses; and so long as the bi-cameral 
system of legislation shall persist, 
some such improvement as this wil< 
greatly increase the efficiency of that 
system. 



The Ledger Almost Persuaded 

The Philadelphia Public Ledger, in 
an editorial, January 29, dealing 
with the President's veto of the Im- 
migration bill, says that "the argu- 
ments against the literacy test have 
been again and again repeated" and 
reminds us that it was this feature 
that caused Presidents Cleveland and 
Taft to veto similar measures. Then 
the Ledger writer calls attention to 
President Wilson's suggestion that 
the voters should pass upon the 
question before such legislation is 
again undertaken, and makes this 
comment: 

"Congress will do well to heed his 
advice. He gives it very tactfully, 
intimating that he does not presume 
to set his opinion, as an opinion 
above that of Senators and Represen- 
tatives. But he might do so; for he 
is as undeniably right as they are un- 
deniably wrong." 

Of course the Ledger is entitled to 
its opinion and so is the President; 



98 



Equity 



but the opinion of the "sovereign 
people" remains unknown, and there 
is no existing process for ascertain- 
ing it on a national scale. The 
Ledger on other occasions has railed 
at the Referendum as a dangerous 

innovation. 

***** 

The Ledger editor on another day 
dug up the popular vote figures for 
1912 and discovered that in that year 
2,450,000 more votes were cast 
against Wilson than for him, in spite 
of the fact that a majority of the 
electoral college made him the next 
president. On this the Ledger re- 
marks thus : 

"Supposing the vote is analyzed from 
the standpoint of an important policy 
of government. Mr. Wilson stood for 
a low tariff, and both Mr. Taft and 
Colonel Roosevelt stood for a high 
tariff. The combined Republican and 
Progressive vote was 7,604,463, which 
means' that 1,311,444 more votes were 
cast for a high tariff than for a low 
tariff. Yet Congress immediately re- 
vised the tariff downward." 

What does this mean? If it does 
not signify that on a great political 
issue like this we should have some 
means of finding and enforcing the 
will of the people, then what does it 
signify ? 

The Great Teacher — Experience. 

If less than a majority of all the 
voters of a community should happen 
to do something which was bad for 
the community, would not that force 
the rest of the voters to "sit up and 
take notice," and would not the rest 
of the voters put the question to the 
minority? Might not that prove a 
highly stimulating experience for the 
community? No one will rise in 
meeting and assert that legislatures 
or city councils as now constituted do 
not often make serious mistakes. 

But in the absence of the I. and R., 
what effective way is there for cor- 



recting the particular mistakes in 
legislation made by a legislature? 
Electing another legislature or city 
council, equally uncontrolled, is not 
going to correct those mistakes. 

Besides, if an initiated measure 
should be adopted by less than a ma- 
jority of all the voters, and should 
turn out to be a mistake, would not 
the non-voting majority share the re- 
sponsibility and thus learn by real 
experience the importance of paying 
attention to measures submitted in 
future? This is the true answer to all 
of those critics, some in entire sin- 
cerity, no doubt, but in ignorance, 
who are wont to say, as did the Pitts- 
burgh Dispatch in a recent editorial: 
"Would it not be a wiser law to re- 
quire at least a majority of the voters 
to vote, to make a Referendum ef- 
fective, and to call for at least a 
quarter of the total voters in favor 
of it before any measure at stake is 
carried?" 

This argument always ignores the 
fundamental fact that every move- 
ment for human betterment has to 
have a beginning in some one or some 
few minds, that it has to have its 
pioneers. Furthermore, this argument 
ignores the often proved fact of hu- 
man experience, that to require the 
proposers of a given measure to over- 
come the inertia of a busy and pre- 
occupied people to so high an extent 
as a quarter of the whole electorate, 
simply plays into the hands of the 
"corrupt and contented" standpatters 
of society. It closes the door to prac- 
tically every forward proposition. 

And yet, what society wants is tt 
have the benefit of every serious ana 
worthy suggestion commanding the 
belief of a considerable number of 
reputable citizens^ However, the 
number necessary to have a measure 
submitted should be large enough 
to insure the community against 
freak measures. 



Editorial 



99 



[Reprint of article contributed to the 
National Editorial Service by Dr. Taylor 
and published on February 28 in a large 
number of daily newspapers, including the 
Philadelphia Public Ledger, Baltimore 
News, Minneapolis Tribune, Los Angeles 
Times, and others.] 

SIMPLIFYING OUR 

STATE GOVERNMENTS 



The Object of All Reforms Should Be 
to Diminish Legislation and Make 
It of Better Quality. 



By DR. CHARLES FREMONT TAYLOR 

About 40 State Legislatures are 
now in session grinding away at the 
legislative mill. During the five 
years from 1909 to 1913, inclusive, 
our State Legislatures made 62,014 
laws! Such an astonishing output 
of legislation has never been seen in 
any other part of the world. What 
we need is not more laws, but fewer, 
and better. 

The average legislator serves only 
for a single term. During that time 
there is usually but one session of 
the Legislature, and in many States 
the length of session is limited to 40, 
60 or 90 days. The average legis- 
lator has had absolutely no previous 
preparation for his responsibile du- 
ties as a lawmaker. At the end of 
his first term he is usually succeeded 
by another as devoid of preparation 
or experience as he. This is true of 
the vast majority of 'the members of 
all our State Legislatures. 

When we consider the crude mater- 
ial constituting our Legislatures, we 
cannot be surprised at the crudity of 
the product, nor at the awkward at- 
tempt to make up for quality by in- 
creasing the quantity. 

We shall never have a better qual- 
ity of legislative product until we 
have a better quality of legislators. 



The first step in attaining this ob- 
ject is to reduce the number. For 
example: New Hampshire has 405 
members in the lower house; Ver- 
mont, 243; Connecticut, 258; Massa- 
chusetts, 240; Pennsylvania, 207, etc. 
The members of the upper houses 
are less numerous, none going above 
100, but as a rule they also are far 
too numerous. 

Undoubtedly our State legislative 
product would be better if State Leg- 
islatures were to consist of a single 
body only, of a few members and well 
paid, chosen with reference to their 
preparedness and ability for the re- 
sponsible and difficult task of law- 
making. Why keep the old tradition 
of two legislative bodies? In the 
last decade over 300 municipalities 
have abandoned the old form and 
adopted a single and small legis- 
lative body, usually of only three or 
five members. 

Uncontrolled authority concentrat- 
ed in a small body might be a temp- 
tation to party machines and cor- 
rupting corporations to get control 
of such body, in which event the 
danger of legislation in the interest 
of political machines and powerful 
corporations would be greater than 
at present, yet municipalities which 
have thus concentrated legislative 
authority have avoided these dangers 
by providing for the Referendum. 
No sensible corporation will buy 
legislation from a legislative lobby 
which cannot "deliver the goods." 
The Referendum prevents the deliv- 
ery of any legislative ''goods" not 
wanted by the voters. In this way 
the corrupt lobby has been killed in 
these municipalities, as is shown by 
the improved character and efficiency 
of their government. And the Re- 
ferendum has been actually used very 
few times. Its mere presence in the 
charter guards the people againstt 



100 



Equity 



vicious legislation, just as the mere 
presence of a policeman usually in- 
sures good order in a public place. 

This brief glance at the improve- 
ment in municipal government sug- 
gests the proper way to improve 
State government. A constitutional 
convention will meet in Albany, N. 
Y., early in April of this year for 
the purpose of proposing a new con- 
stitution for the great State. Will 
this convention break the traditions of 
the past and provide a State govern- 
ment cast in a modern mold? Will 
it provide for a single legislative 
body, of few members, well select- 
ed, well paid and well prepared for 
their task? This body would give 
its entire time to its work and would 
promulgate laws as needed, and al- 
ways after the most careful consider- 
ation and investigation. One such 
law would serve the public better 
than a hundred ordinary laws. Laws 
would then be simple, easily under- 
stood and far-reaching. 

The small legislative bodies (com- 
missions) of municipalities have also 
been given large appointive and ex- 
ecutive powers. This is contrary to 
the old theory of complete separation 
of legislative and administrative de- 
partments. This combining of the 
legislative and executive powers and 
responsibilities in the same hands 
works well in our regenerated muni- 
cipal governments. It has always 
worked well in other countries where 
the separation idea never took root. 
The concentration makes for simpli- 
city and efficiency, and it is entirely 
safe when guarded by the Referen- 
dum for possible legislative errors or 
venality, and by the Recall for pos- 
sible official incompetence or crook- 
edness. 

The future State government will 
be simpler and more efficient than 
the present State governments; and 
at the same time it will be more 



responsive to popular needs and 
wishes. These desirable improve- 
ments will be achieved by adopting 
the plans that have proven success- 
ful elsewhere. The separation idea 
will be abandoned, and greater pow- 
ers, both legislative and administra- 
tive, will be concentrated in fewer 
hands. But the Referendum and 
Recall will always be on guard to in- 
sure faithfulness to the interests of 
the general public instead of service 
to party organizations and power- 
ful corporations. What State will 
be the first to set this pattern? 

New York's constitutional con- 
vention will sit in April, and it will 
struggle with the problem of State 
government probably until Septem- 
ber. The subject of a constitutional 
convention is being seriously discuss- 
ed in many other States, notably in 
Illinois and Pennsylvania. The need 
is for short constitutions, giving a 
simpler and more efficient State gov- 
ernment. The steps toward this goal 
are a shorter ballot, fewer elected 
officers, with larger powers, and 
with the possibility of direct con- 
trol by the voters in order to pro- 
tect against abuse of concentrated 
powers. 



A So-Called "Argument." 

The Springfield, Mass., Union gives 
vent to this supposedly unanswerable 
argument against the I., R. and R.: 

"That the initiative is already in 
good working order in Massachusetts 
is shown by the fact that 2150 bills 
have been introduced in the Legisla- 
ture. With the referendum also in 
action the voters of the common- 
wealth would have a sweet and en- 
joyable time studying into the merits 
of these measures and voting intelli- 
gently upon them. Only a rabid re- 
actionary would dare to suggest that 
the average voter does not have the 
time or inclination to give intelligent 
consideration to 2000 legislative 
measures in one year, or that a con- 
siderable number of the voters are 



Editorial 



101 



not mentally equipped for the job. 
That would be a rank insult to an 
interested and alert electorate, fully 
one-half of which could not name one 
out of a hundred of the many meas- 
ures passed by the Legislature each 
year." 

Does the Union seriously imagine 
that this sort of talk is going to fool 
any thoughtful man or woman? Be- 
cause so many bills have been intro- 
duced to date, by the members of the 
legislature, the Initiative is in "good 
working order." Whose Initiative, 
forsooth? Had any one of these 2150 
bills back of it the opinion of a con- 
siderable number of citizens of the 
state? If so, there was no means 
of giving official data or public rec- 
ord of the fact. It is customary in 
criticizing our lawmaking bodies for 
representatives to introduce measures 
made "by request" without even stat- 
ing what person or special interest 
made the request. How far does the 
personal opinion or criticism of the 
representatives enter into the choice 
of legislation? 

Is this the Union's idea of the 
Initiative "in good working order?" 
The Union omits all reference to the 
fact that the proposed Massachusetts 
plan requires that a petition to initiate 
a bill would require the written 
signatures of 25,000 voters. 

But that is not all. The adoption 
of this plan does not contemplate for a 
moment the abandonment of the rep- 
resentative process. It does mean 
that when that process breaks down 
through the failure of the elected 
representatives to pass a measure 
that the people really want, or that a 
considerable number think is desir- 
able, then this measure can be forced 
into the arena of public discussion 
and legislative action. 

Having thus, in a sentence, lightly 
disposed of the Initiative (in reality 
by concealing the real plan and pur- 



pose), the Union scribe goes on with 
his flippant misrepresentation of the 
Referendum. He would have his 
readers believe that with that plan 
in operation the voters would be 
obliged to examine and pass on 2000 
or more bills! 

Again, let it be said with all em- 
phasis, that the adoption of the Ref- 
erendum does not contemplate the 
abolition of the legislature or the 
submission of all its acts to the peo- 
ple. Only when the legislature has 
enacted a law that a considerable 
number of people think is bad does 
the Referendum instrument compel 
the submission of that particular act 
to the decision of the voters at the 
polls. 

It behooves the man of property 
and of power to get busy about the 
matter of public welfare, when a com- 
munity has the Initiative and Refer- 
endum. He can't afford not to do so. 
It compels him to find out what the 
people want and what they need; to 
get acquainted with the community 
of which he is a part. 



Standards of Public Service Higher. 

The Boston Advertiser in an editor- 
ial headed "Reform — Backwards," 
quoted Speaker Cushing of the Mass- 
achusetts legislature as having said 
that one of the most impressive 
things in public life is "the marked 
deterioration of the standards of men 
in public office, hereabouts, since the 
direct voting laws went into effect in 
this commonwealth." The Advertiser 
itself, is of the opinion that "what- 
ever the explanation may be, the fact 
is beyond question that, with the 
adoption of the direct voting laws, 
the demagogue, the essentially cheap 
man in politics forges to the front, 
and the more reputable class of office- 
holders seems to dwindle in represen- 
tation." The Advertiser refers, of 



102 



Equity 



course, to the direct primary system 
and seeks to use this alleged "fact" 
as an argument against the adoption 
of the Initiative and Referendum 
system now under consideration in 
that state. 

The fact is that this line of talk is 
itself pretty "cheap." It is also 
loose and unscientific. If Mr. Cushing 
and the Advertiser really mean that 
there are more men of moderate 
means and of progressive thought 
coming into active participation in 
public affairs, there may be some 
truth in that. It may also be true 
that there are fewer men of towering 
genius or power apparently in the 
public eye simply because a larger 
number of people are taking an active 
part in public affairs than formerly. 
But that standards of personal or of- 
ficial morality are lower now than at 
any other period of our national life 
may well be questioned. The whole 
effect and tendency of the larger par- 
ticipation of the electorate in matters 
of government is toward the dissem- 
ination of intelligence among the 
people. And therein lies the essential- 
ly conservative character of the Ini- 
tiative and Referendum movement. 



The Oregon Fish Story. 

There is a story still receiving wide 
circulation through newspapers that 
are not as yet friendly to the Initia- 
tive and Referendum movement, 
which the editors evidently regard as 
a very cute instance to illustrate the 
absurdity or futility of the Initiative 
as an instrument of popular govern- 
ment. They repeat this story as if 
it were some dainty morsel which 
they take great pleasure in rolling 
under their tongues. 

According to this yarn, the Initia- 
tive was so employed by two rival 
groups of salmon fishermen, one in 
the upper part of the Columbia River 



and the other in the lower part of it, 
that each initiated a law to prohibit 
the operations of the other. Thus 
it would appear that the salmon fish- 
ing industry of that great river was 
completely stopped for all time, inas- 
much as both of the measures initia- 
ted were in fact adopted by popular 
vote. 

The newspaper repetitions of this 
story generally leave it at this point, 
with some sarcastic remark as to "the 
beauties of the Initiative and Refer- 
endum" and of the unlimited possi- 
bilities of perversion when placed in 
the hands of "the ignorant and un- 
thinking people." 

The truth about this matter has un- 
doubtedly been published many times, 
but the saying is that the truth never 
catches up with a newspaper yarn 
cleverly told. Believing that many 
credulous people are misled by this 
particular instance of how the Initia- 
tive was used in Oregon, we want to 
give very briefly the exact facts of 
the whole matter. Senator Bourne, 
of Oregon, stated these facts very 
clearly in a speech delivered in the 
Senate on May 5th, 1910, on the sub- 
ject of "Popular vs. Delegated Gov- 
ernment." Senator Bourne said: 
"For a great many years there had 
been efforts to secure adequate 
laws for the protection of salmon 
in the Columbia River, but be- 
cause of conflicting interests be- 
tween the upper river and the low- 
er river, legislatures could not be 
induced to enact laws that would 
protect the fish. As a consequence 
the salmon fisheries were being de- 
stroyed. At the election in 1908 
the upper river fishermen propos- 
ed under the Initiative a bill prac- 
tically prohibiting fishing on the 
lower river, and the lower-river 
fishermen proposed a bill forbid- 
ding fishing on the upper river. 
There was wide discussion of both 
bills, and the suggestion was free- 
ly made that both bills should be 
adopted. The people, disgusted 



Editorial 



103 



with the failure of the legislatures 
to enact suitable laws for the pro- 
tection of fish, followed this sug- 
gestion, and both bills were enact- 
ed. With fishing practically pro- 
hibited on both sections of the riv- 
er, the legislature in 1909 respond- 
ed to the popular demand by en- 
acting, in conjunction with the leg- 
islature of the state of Washing- 
ton, a fishery law, which provided 
adequate protection. I believe I 
am safe in saying that this would 
not have been done but for the 
popular adoption of the two fish- 
ery bills." 

It thus becomes perfectly apparent 
that this whole affair has been pur- 
posely distorted and misrepresented by 
the papers that persist in telling the 
story as indicated above. The net re- 
sult was a distinct gain to the peo- 
ple of Oregon in the law which reg- 
ulated the salmon-fishing industry 
for all concerned. The people, even 
in this peculiar case, appeared to 
have decided wisely and to have forc- 
ed the legislature to do its long- 
neglected duty. Generally the peo- 
ple can be trusted to look out for the 
people's interest. 

Do not be surprised if some papers 
and speakers, either ignorantly or 
maliciously, continue to circulate 
this story in a distorted shape. The 
true story is easy, straight and at- 
tractive; so we must question the mo- 
tives or the intelligence of those who 
tell this story in a false and distorted 
way. 



Compelling Men of Power to Vote. 

For a great many years our civic 
moralists and well-intentioned re- 
formers have been deploring the fact 
that the "better element" of the elec- 
torate fail to vote at the primaries 
and at the other elections. But the 
"better element" has gone right on 
not voting. Why? Is it not that 
these citizens, representing the large 
business interests, have found out a 



more effective, if indirect, way of 
safeguarding their interests by using 
the secret bi-partisan machine? Thus 
are orders given to legislatures, 
which the lawmakers dare not disre- 
gard. Let the dear people have 
their bauble of the ballot and imagine 
that they are enjoying self-govern- 
ment, but as for the "better element," 
it will continue to neglect to go to the 
polls, at least if it interferes with 
personal pleasure or business routine. 

Is there, then, no remedy for a situ- 
ation thus fraught with disaster to 
the community in which the responsi- 
bility for bad laws and corrupt gov- 
ernment is so difficult to place? The 
answer is simply that when final re- 
sponsibility is fixed on the electorate 
itself, through the operation of the 
Initiative and Referendum, the strong 
and intelligent elements of the com- 
munity are compelled by sheer force 
of self-defense to do the thing that 
the moralists have all along urged 
them to do in vain, namely, cast 
their votes and see that they are 
counted on the definite propositions 
presented. 

But besides requiring the success- 
ful man to vote as a means of pro- 
tecting his own interests, this system 
of popular government in the long 
run necessitates his consideration of 
the welfare of the whole community. 
He has to meet squarely and in the 
open the needs of the less fortunate, 
not as a matter of charity, but as a 
matter of justice, for the sake of 
peace and health in the whole body 
politic. 

Win or Lose, We Gain. 

There is one sure winning in every 
election where the voters express 
their opinion on any sort of proposi- 
tion. It is the gain which the public 
gets in knowledge of government, 
no matter how the particular question 
may be decided. 



104 Equity 

The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department. 

Continuing the Direct Legislation Record, which was the first publication devoted to the Initiative 
and Referendum. It was started in New Jersey, in 1893, by J. W. Sullivan, as the organ for the 
National Direct Legislation League and various State Leagues. It was continued from 1894 to 
1904 by Mr. Eltweed Pomeroy, and revived and included in Equity Series in 1906. 

Also continuing the Referendum News, formerly published in Washington, D. C, by Mr. Geo. 
H. Shibley, and consolidated with Equity Series early in 1907. 



STAMPEDING THE LEGISLA- 
TURE 



Local Option and Full Crew Repeal 
Demonstrations at Harrisburg 
Leave Legislators Guessing at 
People's Will! Minorities Trying 
to Rule. 

On April 6 about 5,000 citizens 
from all parts of Pennsylvania surged 
into Harrisburg and held a series 
cf enthusiastic demonstrations in 
favor of the local option measure 
pending before the legislature. Gov- 
ernor Brumbaugh, U. S. Senator 
Oliver and other men of prominence 
aided the demonstration with their 
presence and voice. 

The object of this elaborate and 
expensive demonstration (running in- 
to many thousands of dollars) was 
to impress the elected representatives 
of the people with the idea that the 
counties should have the privilege of 
voting, once in three years, as to the 
granting or withholding of saloon 
licenses. 

Only a short time before this the 
railroad corporations got a great 
crowd of people to go to Harrisburg 
as one feature of their very extensive 
and costly campaign to induce the 
legislature to repeal the Full Crew 
law. Similar demonstrations were 
made by the trainmen in defense of 
the law and by the liquor forces in 
opposition to the local option bill. 

What does all this effort and ex- 
pense signify? Why is it necessary? 
What is its net result? 



It means just this: that the people 
of this great state have not yet ob- 
tained an orderly and efficient pro- 
cess of expressing the will of the 
electorate as ,to important questions. 

It means that although a majority 
of the voters have elected the legis- 
lators, the latter have no means of 
knowing what the will of the people 
may be as to any particular measure 
up for consideration. 

That is why the local option advo- 
cates and the Full Crew repealers 
have felt the necessity of making 
these crude, noisy and very expensive 
demonstrations. 

But the net result of these demon- 
strations is at best only a hint at 
what the majority opinion of the 
voters of the state on these questions 
actually is. The impressive throng 
of 5,000 local optionists at Harris- 
burg, after all was said and done, 
amounted to what, in relation to the 
electorate? The presidential vote in 
this state at the 1912 election, for 
all candidates, totaled 1,219,751. This 
means that the 5,000 voters who 
made the big noise at Harrisburg for 
local option amounted to just about 
two-fifths of one per cent of the 
electorate. 

Yet this affair is pointed to by the 
newspapers as a wonderful demon- 
stration of the sentiment of the peo- 
ple. Says the Philadelphia Public 
Ledger: 

Never before in the history of 
Pennsylvania has there been such an 
emphatic expression of the will of the 
people as upon the question of local 
option. However the votes of the 



The Initiative y Referendum and Recall Department 



105 



several legislative districts last fall 
may be interpreted, it is unmistakably 
clear that there is a popular demand 
for local option today. The delega- 
tions that appeared in Harrisburg 
yesterday to support Governor Brum- 
baugh's bill undoubtedly represent the 
prevailing sentiment and conviction 
of the Commonwealth. 

Now we are not here concerned 
with the pros and cons of local op- 
tion and, for all we know, it may be 
true that a large majority of the 
voters of Pennsylvania have been 
hoping that their representatives at 
Harrisburg would pass a local option 
bill. But v/e don't know it. There 
is no means of our knowing it. Our 
lawmakers at the capital Harrisburg, 
don't know it, nor have they any 
means of finding it out. They do know, 
from these expensive and noisy gath- 
erings of the voters, that a very small 
percentage of voters want local option. 
But that is all. And yet some peo- 
ple talk about the 5 per cent or S 
per cent of voters generally required 
for merely obtaining a submission in 
the Initiative and Referendum states 
as being "minority government." 
But if these mob-like demonstrations 
are to stampede our legislators into 
has'ty legislation,, this would be minor- 
ity rule with a vengeance. Opponents 
of the Referendum even go so far as 
to be dissatisfied because the total 
vote on measures submitted to the 
people averages about 70 per cent of 
the full registered vote. But here the 
opportunity is given for every voter 
in the state to express his opinion if 
he has one. 

It may be said that, as a candidate, 
Governor Brumbaugh declared him- 
self for local option; and that on this 
account the decision of the people 
for local option must be assumed in 
his election. But it must be remem- 
bered that he declared for many 
other policies at the same time; and 



that the fact of his being the nominee 
of the Republican party organization 
carried with it a multitude of voters 
regardless of the party platform. 
The leaders of that party today, or 
some of them, are still opposed to 
local option. Evidently they do not 
take Brumbaugh's election as a man- 
date for local option. 

Now why, in the name of common 
sense and of the ideal of self govern- 
ment for which the American nation 
stands, should not the voters of 
Pennsylvania possess the orderly, 
systematic, and relatively inexpen- 
sive instrumentality for expressing 
their majority will upon this impor- 
tant public policy, or upon any other 
particular question of importance? 

•With that instrument in the hands 
of the voters, every great issue that 
comes up would be capable of a defi- 
nite and authoritative disposal at a 
given time, in an orderly and lawful, 
intelligent and deliberate manner. 
Contrast that with these attempts 
of a noisy handful of the voters to 
stampede the legislature. This comes 
perilously near the ''gusty passions 
of the mob" which our great and good 
friend, Mr. Taft, so often warns us 
against. It is this sort of "mob law" 
that the friends of genuine popular 
government always deplore. We 
want public questions to be decided 
by the voters in orderly and deliber- 
ate fashion at regular elections, 
when legislatures have failed to do 
their duty. 

With these orderly instruments in 
use, the elected legislators would 
know that if they failed, either from 
incorrect judgment or from willful 
disregard of their duty, to enact a 
measure wanted by the people, then 
the people could rise in their supreme 
might and enforce their will at the 
next regular election. 



106 



Equity 



Thus the temptation of powerful 
interests to bribe legislators would 
be removed for it would never be cer- 
tain that the legislators could "de- 
liver the goods." On the other hand, 
a new and strong incentive would be 
given to our representatives in the 
legislature to try to find out what 
the people want done, or not done*, 
and then to give us in fact as well 
as in name, "representative govern- 
ment." 

Governor Brumbaugh, in his ad- 
dress to the local optionists, said he 
was a firm believer in the right of the 
people to rule and put the question 
thus: 

It is not a "wet" or "dry" measure. 
Only false men and ignorant men will 
hold this. The whole issue is "shall 
the people themselves have the right 
once in three years to decide 
for themselves whether or not licenses 
shall issue for the sale of intoxicants 
in the several counties of Pennsyl- 
vania?" If you believe in the rule of 
the people, if you trust the people, if 
you are a real American, you cannot 
deny the fairness of this proposition. 
* * * 

What right have the delegated 
representatives of the people to deny 
the people a right that is as funda- 
mental as that by -which they choose 
delegated representatives? If the peo- 
ple are not to be given this right, by 
•what reason are they given any 
right? They rule in this country, and 
giving them their own is giving what 
we cannot justly deny. 

The Governor is right and his 
stand on this question is a stand for 
the system by which the people may 
always have the possibility of final 
direct control of their own affairs. 
The people of Pennsylvania must 
wake up to this important truth. 



issued the following statement of his 
position on the question of the Recall 
of judges and of judicial decisions: 

"If such justices as Stone, Ostrander, 
Steere and others like them had been 
elected for life, with a proper right of 
recall, the recall never would have 
been applied," said Mr. Osborn. "As 
it is, under the present system, Judges 
kowtow to politicians, cater to fac- 
tions, mix up in partisan politics and 
there is no time between the period of 
elective recall and their immediate ac- 
tions upon the bench in which heated 
feelings may cool. 

"I believe that all Judges should be 
elected for life and that the judiciary 
should be nonpartisan. Simple recall 
machinery should be provided by peti- 
tion. To insure against hasty action, 
no recall should be permitted to be ex- 
ercised unless set in operation at least 
three months before a regular election. 
Under our present defective partisan 
system it is an amazing credit to the 
people that they have builded the hon- 
orable, dignified and capable judiciary 
that exists in Michigan today." 



Osborn on Judicial Recall 

Prior to the election, Ex-Governor 
Osborn of Michigan, while standing as 
a Republican candidate for governor, 



Bryan Rebukes Hoosier Lawmakers 

The democratic lawmakers of In- 
diana got only "what was coming" to 
them, but probably more than they 
had anticipated, when on February 
5th by their own invitation the veter- 
an Democratic leader, Secretary of 
State Bryan, addressed Governor 
Ralston and a joint session of the 
legislature in the capitol at India- 
napolis. Mr. Bryan referred at the 
outset to the fact that he was speak- 
ing "as one who is not ashamed to 
be a Democrat to a legislature that 
is Democratic." He defended the 
principle of the direct primary in 
party government and advocated 
making constitutions less difficult to 
amend. He said that in the early 
days, before we were afraid to fully 
trust the people, we put into our state 
and federal constitutions provisions 
for amendment which were exceed- 
ingly difficult to employ, and cited 
the fact that it took us twenty-one 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



107 



years to amend the federal constitu- 
tion so as to elect senators by direct 
vote of the people. 

He also spoke in detail of the In- 
diana constitution with its require- 
ment that an amendment, after twice 
passing both branches of the legisla- 
ture, must be ratified by a majority 
of all the voters , instead of a majority 
voting thereon. Speaking directly to 
these legislators who had refused to 
alter this provision, Mr. Bryan told 
them that it gave to those opposed 
to a proposed change "the benefit of 
all the ignorant and all the indiffer- 
ent," by counting all who fail to vote 
at all on an amendment but vote for 
candidates, as against the amend- 
ment. Thus it gave the conservative 
forces of society an undue advantage. 
He advocated the calling of a con- 
vention to frame a constitution that 
would be modern and more easily and 
quickly amended. 

But it was when he came to the 
subject of the Initiative and Refer- 
endum that he said things that must 
have caused cold chills to go down 
the spines of some of his hearers. He 
asked them the following pointed 
questions: 

No man can dispute the principles 
upon which the Initiative and Refer- 
endum rest. Are you afraid to sub- 
mit these questions to the voters of 
the state? You recognize the super- 
ior wisdom of these voters when you 
submit important matters to them. 
What did you mean in your last legis- 
lature when you proposed to submit to 
the voters of the state a number of 
amendments to the constitution? What 
do you mean when you say that before 
you can have a constitutional conven- 
tion you must ask the consent of the 
voters of the state? Why do you pay 
this tribute to the intelligence of your 
voters and then insult that intelli- 
gence by not allowing them to sit in 
judgment upon what you do? 

Are you afraid that your constitu- 
ents will rebuke you for what you 
have done, or for what you have fail- 
ed to do? 



What is the advantage of the Initia- 
tive? It is this, that, if the represen- 
tatives do not do what the people want 
done, the people can do it themselves. 

And what is the advantage of the 
Referendum? It is this, that, if the 
representatives do what they ought 
not to do, the people can veto it and 
save themselves from the effects of 
bad legislation. How will you defend 
your position, if you are willing that 
they shall sit in judgment on a con- 
stitution that is more sacred than a 
law and yet not willing to allow them 
to sit in judgment upon a law? How 
will you defend your position if you 
vote that you can not have a constitu- 
tional convention until the people ask 
for it, and then refuse to let them ask 
for a statute which they desire? 

Will the Initiative and Referendum 
destroy popular government? No. They 
will simply purify popular govern- 
ment, that is all. Will it be impos- 
sible to find men who will serve the 
people under the Initiative and Ref- 
erendum? No. You will simply find 
different people ready to serve. You 
will find candidates who are not afraid 
to let the people instruct them. 

As between the Initiative and Ref- 
erendum, Mr. Bryan declared his be- 
lief that the former is the more im- 
portant of the two. His reasoning 
in support of this is, that while the 
Referendum enables you to veto a 
law, the Initiative not only enables 
you to propose a measure but to re- 
peal an objectionable law at a subse- 
quent date by the operation of the 
Initiative. He admitted 'that these 
instruments may not have been need- 
ed so much in the earlier days before 
the growth of the great corporate 
special interests; but the existence of 
these "man-made giants," made it 
necessary for the people to have 
these means of protecting them- 
selves. Finally he put this direct 
question to his Democratic brethren 
of Indiana: 

Are you afraid to give the people 
control of their own government? 
Then, my friends, you do not believe 
in the fundamental principles of free 
government. 

Are you afraid that, if the people 



108 



Equity 



have this law they will make mis- 
takes? Of course they will make mis- 
takes. But the people have a right to 
make their own mistakes; no legisla- 
ture has a God-given right to make 
mistakes for the rest of the people. 

And the people will not be so apt to 
make mistakes as the representatives 
are to make mistakes for them, for it 
never pays the people to make mis- 
takes. It is sometimes profitable for 
legislators to make mistakes at the 
expense of the people. 



Commission Government Analyzed 

We have received a copy of an in- 
teresting report made by a special 
committee of the National Municipal 
League on "The Commission Plan 
and Commission-Manager Plan of 
Municipal Government." The com- 
mittee was composed of Prof. Chas. 
A. Beard of Columbia, Ernest S. 
Bradford, author of ''Commission 
Government in American Cities," 
Richard S. Childs, Secretary of the 
National Short Ballot Organization, 
Prof. Wm. B. Monroe of Harvard and 
Clinton Rogers Woodruff, editor of 
the National Municipal Review. 

All of these men have achieved 
great distinction as students of 
municipal and governmental prob- 
lems. The report is prefaced by a 
list of the commission-governed cities 
having over 25,000 population, and 
the statement is made that there 
were at the time of the completion 
of this report, June 1, 1914, 7,705,735 
people living in commission-governed 
municipalities in this country. Speak- 
ing of the "major features" of com- 
mission government in practise, the 
committee finds that it is a "relative 
success" as compared with older 
forms, judging from results, and that 
success comes primarily because it is 
more democratic; that is, more sensi- 
tive to public opinion than the old 
form. This sensitiveness is due to 
the "unification of powers" as com- 
pared with the old separation of 



powers, so that there is no evasion 
of full responsibility. Other fea- 
tures which have contributed to the 
success of this form are found to be 
the Short Ballot, the Non-partisan 
Ballot, the Initiative and Referen- 
dum, the Recall and the abolition of 
ward lines. 

In stating the conclusions of the 
committee concerning the Initiative 
and Referendum, it is said that they 
"have proved useful as provisions for 
allaying the time honored popular 
fear of intrusting large powers to 
single bodies." The committee is of 
the opinion however, that "the sensi- 
tiveness of commission government 
reduces the necessity for these de- 
vices," and notes the fact that their 
use is very uncommon in commission- 
governed cities. 

It seems to us, however, that the 
infrequency of the use of the Initia- 
tive and Referendum in commission- 
governed cities is an inadequate rea- 
son for concluding that their neces- 
sity, as a reserved power of the peo- 
ple, is reduced. In common with 
most of the advocates of these direct 
powers of popular control, we have 
always expressed the belief that with 
increased efficiency of government 
through the unification of powers and 
the fixing of official responsibility, 
the likelihood or need of using the 
Initiative and Referendum or the Re- 
call would be greatly decreased until 
eventually they might not be used at 
all. But that is very far from the 
conclusion that any city, however 
well governed on the commission or 
any other plan, can safely exist with- 
out the possibility of direct popular 
control of its affairs being provided 
for in its fundamental law. 

The fact is that the experience of 
the commission-governed cities thus 
cited by this distinguished commit- 
tee tends to remove one of the prin- 
cipal objections frequently offered to 



The March of 
Popular Government 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 

the Initiative and Referendum, name- 
ly, that it will be used too frequently, 
and will therefore weary the voters 
by continual appeals to them on mat- 
ters of no great consequence. 

The committee finds that "the Re- 
call is a desirable, but not indis- 
pensible extention and modification 
of the right to elect," and they add 
"we have no evidence that it has 
been misused." But they appear to 
think that because the commission 
plan is more sensitive to public opin- 
ion, that the Recall is less needed 
than with the old plan. This con- 
clusion again is not entirely satis- 
factory to the logical mind. The 
fact that the Recall has not been 
frequently used in the cities possess- 
ing that instrument is, it seems to 
us, a very poor argument in favor 
of dispensing with the instrument. 
It may be regarded somewhat in the 
light of an accident insurance policy. 
A city can never tell when it may be 
confronted with an extraordinary 
chain of circumstances, due to in- 
competency or dereliction on the 
part of elected officials, even under 
the commission plan of government, 
which would make it necessary to 
use the reserved power of the people 
to "un-elect" one whom they had in- 
trusted with certain responsibilities. 

No government, whether city or 
state, can be called truly democratic 
which does not, in its fundamental 
law, recognize the possibility of final 
direct supervision by the voters of 
the acts of their chosen representa- 
tives. 



109 



In a system of government that 
rests upon popular authority, no prin- 
ciple can be more fundamental than 
that the electorate shall have oppor- 
tunity for direct final control of pub- 
lic affairs, when the delegated organs 
of government do not give general 
satisfaction. 



Arizona 

The forces of reaction have left 
their imprint upon the recent session 
of the Arizona legislature. By the 
comparatively close vote of 19 to 16 
the lower house passed a senate bill 
submitting to the voters of the state 
an amendment providing that initia- 
tive and referendum measures must 
receive a majority of all the votes 
cast for candidates at an election, 
in order to be adopted, instead of a 
majority of the votes cast for the 
particular measure or measures on 
the ballot. 

The enactment of this bill by the 
legislature is one thing, and its rati- 
fication by the voters of Arizona is 
another. We have not the slightest 
doubt that the electorate of this new 
and progressive state will promptly 
and overwhelmingly repudiate the 
action of the legislature. It is in- 
conceivable, when this proposition is 
understood by the people of Arizona, 
that they will submit to a change 
so manifestly unjust and inequitable. 
We shall, in a future number, hope 
to present the experience of all the 
states in respect to the method of 
adopting amendments to their con- 
stitutions; and we are sure that the 
presentation of this experience will 
throw a bright light upon the ques- 
tion thus raised in Arizona. 

Governor Hunt, in his annual mes- 
sage to the legislature, spoke in 
warm defense of the initiative and 
referendum amendment. He referred 
to the chorus of criticism it had 
aroused because of a few minor de- 
ficiencies in a few laws enacted by 
the voters. He declared that to utter 
a sweeping condemnation of the Ini- 



110 



Equity 



tiative on such grounds was wholly 
unwarranted, and he reasserted the 
merits of the Initiative as "a safe- 
guard of liberty, and as an exempli- 
fication of the basic rights of the 
governed to enact their own laws." 
The main defect to which the gov- 
ernor was disposed to give serious 
attention was that of inadequate 
publicity concerning measures sub- 
mitted to the voters, and the conse- 
quent failure of a considerable per- 
centage of voters to vote on these 
questions; but in the dissemination 
of information about these measures, 
he did not think it wise to depend 
chiefly upon the newspapers of pri- 
vate ownership and of differing polit- 
ical complexion. 

Secretary of State Osborn, in his 
annual report, complained that it was 
impossible to ascertain whether or 
not the signers of initiative petitions 
are qualified electors, and conse- 
quently authorized to sign such peti- 
tions. The remedy for this he believ- 
ed would be to provide for the regis- 
tration of voters as one of the quali- 
fications of an electorate, this quali- 
fication not now being required un- 
der the constitution of the state. 

Arkansas 

It is now probable that a substitute 
for the initiative and referendum 
amendment to the Arkansas consti- 
tution, which was adopted by the 
voters in 1910, will be submitted to 
the voters at the next general elec- 
tion in September 1916. More than 
the required number of signatures to 
petitions for this proposed substitute 
has been filed with the secretary of 
state, largely through the instru- 
mentality of the State Federation of 
Labor. We are informed by Mr. L. 
H. Moore, Secretary-Treasurer of 
that organization, that the necessary 
signatures were obtained in time to 



make the proposed amendment the 
third on the list, thus assuring it 
against being ruled out on the score 
of the limited number of amendments 
permitted to be voted on at one elec- 
tion, as was done with the state-wide 
recall amendment two years ago. 

At that time the recall amendment 
had been adopted by an overwhelm- 
ing majority of the voters, but was 
invalidated by a decision of the 
state supreme court on the technical 
ground that three other amendments 
had been placed upon the ballot by 
the legislature before the recall 
amemdment. It was then asserted 
by the sponsors of the recall amend- 
ment that the constitutional limit to 
three amendments at one election did 
not apply to amendments introduced 
under the reserved power of the Ini- 
tiative; but this question could only 
be determined by carrying the case 
on appeal to the U. S. supreme court, 
which was not done. 

With this matter still undetermin- 
ed, a curious situation has now de- 
veloped through the fact that the 
present legislature has adopted, and 
the governor has approved, a propo- 
sition to submit a woman suffrage 
amendment to the voters of the state. 
Under the ruling of the state 
supreme court, this suffrage amend- 
ment cannot expect to be recognized 
even if it should be placed on the 
ballot. 

But one of the principal features 
of the initiative and referendum 
amendment now proposed as a sub- 
stitute for the existing law is to de- 
clare that "no limitation shall be 
placed upon the number of constitu- 
tional amendments or other measures 
which may be proposed and submit- 
ted to the people by either initiative 
or referendum petitions," tho the 
old limitation to three amendments 
at one time by legislative submission 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



111 



may stand. This will, of course, 
operate to remove the present limita- 
tion as to the amendment of the state 
constitution. In other respects, also, 
the proposed I. and R. amendment is 
commendable, the principal points of 
which are as follows: 

The Initiative {constitutional or stat- 
utory) requires 10,000 legal voters 
signed to petitions, which must be 
filed four months before the election. 

For the Referendum, 7,000 voters 
must sign petition within ninety 
days after adjournment of a legisla- 
tive session to suspend action, all 
measures referred remaining in 
abeyance until the vote is taken at 
the election. 

Emergency measures supported by a 
three-fourths yea and nay vote of the 
legislature may go into effect at 
once except measures referring to 
franchises or special privileges, such 
emergency measures to be the law un- 
til rejected by a majority of those 
voting thereon. 

The I. and R. powers are reserved 
to the voters of each municipality and 
county; the lecal Initiative is on the 
basis of 10 per cent of the voters, and 
the Referendum on the basis of 15 
per cent. There is a specific prohibi- 
tion against the legislature ever pro- 
viding that measures shall be decided 
by a majority of the votes cast for 
candidates at a general election. It 
is also provided that no measure ap- 
proved by a vote of the people shall 
be amended or repealed by the legis- 
lature or by a city council "except 
by a yea and nay vote upon roll call 
of three-fourths of the members 
elected;" nor shall such a measure 
be invalidated as unconstitutional ex- 
cept by a unanimous decision of the 
supreme court of the state. A further 
prohibition provides that there shall 
be no requirement that signatures 
to petitions be distributed in each 



of the counties of the state; 
nor shall there be any rule made 
against the giving or receiving of 
compensation for circulating of peti- 
tions. But it is provided that laws 
may be enacted penalizing any 
fraudulent practise in connection 
with the signing or circulating of 
petitions. 

Regarding the question of the 
possible submission of the suffrage 
amendment above referred to, we 
have received the following official 
communication: 

STATE OF ARKANSAS 

Department of State, 
Little Rock, April 6, 1915 
Editor of Equity, 

Philadelphia, Pa. 
Dear Sir: — 

Replying to your inquiry of the 
1st inst., will advise that the amend- 
ment passed by the recent legislature 
in regard to woman suffrage, will not 
be submitted at the election of 1916. 
I have not ascertained whether this 
can be held until the election of 1918, 
and then be submitted as one of the 
three amendments allowed by law 
to be voted upon at one election. 
Yours very truly, 
EARLE W. HODGES 

Secretary of State. 

California 

How to prevent abuses of the Ini- 
tiative and Referendum and of the 
Recall in practical operation — this is 
the problem which the best minds of 
the great and progressive state of 
California are now grappling with. 
At last November's election, when 
forty-eight measures were submit- 
ted to the voters of this state, the 
existing system of direct control re- 
ceived what many regard as its acid 
test, and it stood the test well. Even 
the opponents of the Initiative and 



112 



Equity 



Referendum were compelled to admit 
that the voters had shown discrim- 
ination to a remarkable degree in 
their treatment of the various initia- 
ted or referred measures at that time. 
Even in this progressive atmosphere, 
many of the more radical measures 
were defeated, showing that the elec- 
torate as a whole was conservative 
and prudent. Furthermore, the re- 
sult in California showed that the 
people were vitally interested in 
measures as well as in candidates, 
judging from the large percentage 
of the total vote cast on propositions, 
the general average vote on measures 
having been about 90 per cent, of the 
average vote on candidates. 

But in spite of this demonstration 
of the large success and value of the 
system of direct control of legisla- 
tion, it was recognized by the 
staunchest friends of that system 
'that certain abuses had crept into its 
operation, due to looseness or incom- 
pleteness in the drawing of the law. 
Governor Johnson, in his annual mes- 
sage to the legislature in January, 
drew attention to these abuses, most 
of which had occurred in the city 
of San Francisco, where flagrant 
forgeries in the use of petitons had 
been discovered in conection with the 
recall of Senator Grant, author of 
the Redlight Abatement act, and 
which had resulted in the seating of 
Wolfe, the candidate of the vice and 
liquor forces. This case has been 
under investigation by a legislative 
committee, and will be reviewed 
when the report is published. Irreg- 
ularities had also occurred in connec- 
tion with the referendum petitions 
on the Redlight Abatement and other 
progressive measures. The governor 
urged that the law be amended so as 
to make these abuses impossible. 

An appeal for improvements in the 



law was also made in a widely pub- 
lished article by Dr. John R. Haynes 
of Los Angeles, known as the "father 
of the Recall," altho at the same time 
he declared that the system had prov- 
ed successful beyond the fondest 
hopes of it's advocates, saying that 
"the people have displayed wonder- 
ful discrimination in the use of the 
instrument." Dr. B^nes suggested 
the adding of penal provisions against 
fraud in the circulation and signing 
of petitions, and favored having 
every petition contain a title stating 
the general propositions of the pro- 
posed measure in not more than two 
hundred words. Then he would in- 
crease the efficiency of the legislative 
reference bureaus, and would have 
the official voters' hand-books, with 
text of measures and arguments pro 
and con, placed in the hands of all 
voters ait least thirty days before 
the election. 

Under these circumstances and with 
these wise admonitions, the legisla- 
ture has given its consideration to a 
number of measures designed to cor- 
rect abuses of the initiative and ref- 
erendum and the recall sections of 
the constitution. 

Senate Bills 726 and 727, intro- 
duced by Senator Chandler, were 
amended in committee and passed. 
One of these bills provides that 
every person who subscribes a ficti- 
tious name to a petition is guilty of 
a felony and liable to imprisonment 
from one to fourteen years. The 
other provides a penalty of two years 
imprisonment or fine not to exceed 
$5,000, or both, for misrepresenting 
the character of a petition that is be- 
ing circulated. 

A somewhat more radical change 
is contemplated in the Chandler bill 
dealing with the Recall. This pro- 
vides that at a recall election, the 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



113 



only matter to be submitted shall be 
the question of whether or not the 
official concerned shall be removed, 
and does not provide for the election 
of his successor. If the recall prop- 
osition wins, then the office would be 
filled by appointment, as in the case 
of a vacancy caused by resignation 
or death. This would leave the fill- 
ing of the unexpired term of a re- 
called official to the ordinary legal 
process. The object of this change 
is to remove the counter interest that 
has developed in a recall election 
when voters become more concerned 
in removing the official simply to 
elect a candidate who is running 
against him, than they are in recall- 
ing the official for a particular 
breach of conduct warranting dis- 
missal. This point seems to be well 
taken; but at the present time we do 
not know whether action has been 
taken on this measure or not. 

We have received copies of the var- 
ious bills on this subject, and of the 
very complete weekly histories of 
legislative proceedings, from Secre- 
tary of State Jordan, which courtesy 
is duly appreciated. 

Delaware 

The Legislature that has just ad- 
journed will be remembered for the 
cheerful, systematic way in which all 
measures that had the least suspicion 
of a tendency towards the betterment 
of conditions were killed. And of 
course the I. and R. amendment to 
the constitution went down with the 
others. 

The machine representatives of both 
the old parties worked hard and ef- 
fectively against the amendment. Mr. 
Grantland, the speaker of the House, 
and the leader of the Republicans in 
the Legislature, although represent- 
ing a Wilmington district, did his 



best to incite the country members 
against the amendment by telling 
them that Wilmington, with nearly 
half the population of the State, 
might outvote the country districts 
on measures. This was done openly 
and probably had some effect on the 
vote. Senator Gormley, the leader 
of the Democrats, worked quietly 
and effectively, against the amend- 
ment; the very unfavorable vote in 
the Senate was, no doubt, due to his 
work. The vote in the Senate was 
3 in favor and 14 against the amend- 
ment. All in favor were Democrats, 
the opposition vote being 5 Demo- 
crats and 9 Republicans, all voting. 

In the House 17 voted for the 
amendment and 15 against it, — 2 ab- 
sent and 1 not voting; 9 Democrats 
and 8 Republicans voting "aye," and 
9 Republicans and 6 Democrats 
"no." 

It was the average (so-called rep- 
resentative government) legislature 
limited to 60 days with 352 House 
Bills, 190 Senate Bills and 12 Joint 
Resolutions to consider, a total of 
554. At least one-half of the time 
was taken up with organizing and 
public hearings, leaving 30 days time 
for consideration of bills. Almost 
an average of 20 a day. Nearly an 
average of 10 a day if all the time 
could be used for that purpose. In 
addition to this there were many 
bills passed, or killed, and then recon- 
sidered and put back on the calendar; 
bills passed by one house, and then 
called back from the other, etc. 

A member of the Referendum 
League discussed this phase of the 
"system" with quite a number of 
members of both houses. All agreed 
that it was impossible to give any 
intelligent consideration to so many 
bills in the time limit; one member 
going so far as to say that the bills 



114 



Equity 



could not be intelligently read in the 
time given. 

Another interesting phase of this 
legislature was the large number of 
first termers; 31 out of the 35 being 
new members, only one being a mem- 
ber of the preceding Legislature. 

The Referendum people have learn- 
ed some very valuable lessons from 
the defeat, and are going to profit 
thereby in the continued fight for 
popular government. The Referen- 
dum League will probably continue 
the publication of the Delaware Refer- 
endum News as a bi-monthly, and an 
effort will be made to largely increase 
the membership of the League 
throughout the State. 

[Note: — This interesting report was 
made for Equity by John P. Thomas, 
Secretary of the Delaware Referendum 
League.] 

Idaho 

Governor Moses Alexander of 
Idaho has done the people of his 
state valiant service by his exercise 
of the veto power placed in his hands 
by the constitution of the State. On 
March 4 he returned to the legisla- 
ture, without his approval, an act 
intended to put into operation the 
Initiative, Referendum and Recall as 
authorized by the constitutional 
amendment adopted in 1912, but 
which act he found to be so drawn 
that it would have made those powers 
ineffective. 

The bill thus repudiated by the 
governor originated in the House of 
Representatives, where it was intro- 
duced by Mr. Johnston. This bill re- 
quired that petitions for the Initia- 
tive be signed "in each and every 
county of the state by a number of 
electors equal to at least 15 per cent 
of the total vote cast in such county," 
and similarly 25 per cent of the 
voters for invoking the local Initia- 
tive. For the state-wide Referendum, 



it required at least 10 per cent peti- 
tions in every county of the state, 
and for the local Referendum, 30 per 
cent petitions. For the state-wide 
Recall, the percentage of signers was 
made 10 per cent in every county, 
and for the local Recall, 30 per cent. 
In addition to these high percentages 
and unprecedented requirements for 
distribution of the petitioners in 
every county, this bill was further 
hobbled by the provision that a favor- 
able decision at the polls on any 
measure must have a majority of all 
the votes cast at the election. It 
also prohibited any person from cir- 
culating petitions or soliciting sign- 
ers thereto, and required that all 
petitions be signed at the office of 
and in the presence of some law 
official. 

In his veto message, Governor 
Alexander declared that this measure 
meant the adoption of a course di- 
rectly contrary to that which exper- 
ience has demonstrated should be 
adopted. Referring to the required 
distribution of petition signers in all 
the counties, he said that it was the 
opinion of all the friends of the di- 
rect legislation principle that this 
provision alone, even upon a per- 
centage requirement of one-half that 
specified in the bill, would render the 
act inoperative. Similarly was re- 
garded the prohibition of circulating 
petitions. And in conclusion he as- 
serted that "it would be better to 
have no law seeking to make these 
valuable principles effective than to 
have one whose apparent effective- 
ness is not real, and would rather 
bring the principles into disrepute." 
The Johnston bill was not the only 
one under consideration at the recent 
session. In fact, it was adopted in 
the House after a remarkably good 
initiative and referendum bill, pre- 
pared by a nonpartisan committee 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



115 



of progressive citizens, had been de- 
feated by the vote of 31 to 26, the 
Republicans lining up almost solidly 
against the latter. The main feat- 
ures of this bill were described on 
page 134 of the July 1914 Equity. 
The friends of this measure will now 
begin a determined fight looking to 
the retirement of those reactionary 
members who defeated the good I. 
and R. plan. 

Governor Alexander used his veto 
power against another measure en- 
acted at this session by the reaction- 
ary majority, namely, a bill designed 
to give the opponents of the commis- 
sion form of government in Boise an 
opportunity to test their strength 
against the existing government. 

Illinois 

At the time that we write it ap- 
pears to be still in doubt whether 
the legislature of Illinois will author- 
ize the calling of a constitutional 
convention or not. On this proposal 
all the friends of popular govern- 
ment concentrated their efforts, and 
on March 11 it was passed by the 
Senate. Later it failed to receive the 
necessary majority in the House, but 
it was expected the matter would be 
called up again before the end of the 
session. So long as the present 
amending process prevails, namely, 
that only one amendment at a time 
may be submitted to the voters, the 
prospect of improving the out-worn 
and out-of-date constitution of Illi- 
nois is extremely remote. In the 
event of a failure to call a constitu- 
tional convention, every possible 
effort should be made to get through 
a /'gateway" amendment to remove 
this absurd barrier to progress in the 
great state of Illinois. 

On February 11 the town of Lin- 
coln, 111., adopted a commission form 
of government by the vote of 1420 to 



1293, and it is noteworthy that a ma- 
jority of the men voters opposed this 
change, this majority being offset by 
the women voters, who stood almost 
solidly for the improved plan. 

Indiana 

This year's session of the Hoosier 
legislature is chiefly remarkable for 
what it did not do. The one act 
which bears upon the processes of 
government was a primary election 
law, by means of which the control 
of party organizations is placed in 
the hands of their members. Of the 
details of this measure we shall not 
here speak, but this will be touched 
upon in a future number, when the 
whole subject of primary laws will 
be considered. It should be men- 
tioned, however, that this new In- 
diana primary includes provision for 
preferential voting. 

Iowa 

The present session of the Iowa 
legislature has in hand House and 
Senate resolutions, identical with the 
resolutions passed by the preceding 
legislature, providing for the submis- 
sion of an initiative and referendum 
amendment to the constitution at the 
next state election. Favorable action 
is anticipated. The general features 
of this proposed amendment have 
been indicated in former issues of 
Equity, but it may be well to mention 
here that the basis for invoking the 
Initiative is from 12 to 22 percent of 
the qualified electors of each of the 
congressional districts^ leaving the 
percentage within those limits to the 
discretion of the legislature. For 
the Referendum, the limits for fixing 
the percentage of petitioners are 
from 10 to 20 percent of the electors 
of the congressional districts; but 
until the percentage shall have been 
fixed by legislative act, the amend- 



116 



Equity 



ment places the petition requirement 
at 15 percent for both the I. 
and R. All measures submitted 
under this amendment would be 
voted on at the regular biennial 
election following the filing of a peti- 
tion; and the adoption of a proposed 
or referred law would be by a ma- 
jority of the votes cast thereon. 

One interesting provision, which is 
in line with the Massachusetts plan, 
is that the secretary of state shall 
submit a proposed law to the Supreme 
Court for its opinion as to constitu- 
tionality, which opinion shall be ren- 
dered within twenty days. In case 
the opinion is that the measure is not 
constitutional, it shall not be submit- 
ted to the voters. An unusual feature 
of the publicity clause is that the 
pamphlet containing the text and 
arguments for and against measures 
to be submitted shall be distributed 
through the county auditors to the. 
precinct committeemen of the various 
political parties. One very unusual 
provision is that requiring that 
amendments to the constitution shall 
be approved by a majority vote at 
two successive biennial elections. 

Already the legislature has passed 
for the second time, and the gover- 
nor has approved, the woman suffrage 
amendment, which will go on the 
ballot at the next state election. 

Maryland 

The newspapers of Maryland are 
beginning to pay some attention to 
the pending Referendum amendment, 
on which the voters of the state are 
to have the final say at the Novem- 
ber election. Mr. Jackson Ralston, 
in a widely published letter to the 
newspapers of Maryland, points out 
that the election this year is to be 
more important than any held for 
many years, because for the first 



time the citizens will have the op- 
portunity "to reinvest themselves 
with some of the power of which in 
their constitution they have divested 
themselves." 

He refers in this regard to three 
proposed amendments, all of which 
aim to give the people more direct 
contro;l pver their affairs. He re- 
minds the people that the Referen- 
dum amendment was passed by al- 
most a unanimous vote of the Sen- 
ate, and more than the necessary 
three-fifths of the House. He ex- 
plains with great force its method of 
operation, and its justification as a 
measure of popular government; 
that while the idea of a Referendum 
to the people of this country is as old 
as their government, until recent 
years the people have not themselves 
been allowed to challenge directly the 
action of a legislature. They have 
allowed one man in the person of a 
governor, by direct or pocket veto, to 
suspend or defeat a law enacted by 
the legislature; but until lately they 
have believed that this power could 
not be exercised by any percentage 
or even by a majority of the people, 
who have blindly conferred powers 
of legislation upon representatives 
whose actions they could not control. 
Repeal of errors of one legislature by 
the next one has often come too late 
to be of practical value, or the next 
legislature has committed new errors 
aggravating the original offense. 

So argues Mr. Ralston, and de- 
clares to the people of Maryland that 
for the first time in their history 
they have the opportunity to out- 
grow this condition; and in so doing, 
to follow the example of enlightened 
commonwealths which have pioneered 
the way. mentioning Oregon, Cali- 
fornia, Washington, South Dakota, 
Missouri, Ohio and the other I. and 
R. states. In a subsequent letter. 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



117 



Mr. Ralston declares that "the Refer- 
endum after all is nothing but exer- 
cise of power by its original pos- 
sessor." He says we would think a 
long while before giving a power of 
attorney to anybody to bind and 
pledge us without referring to us; 
but that is precisely the thing we do 
when we elect a legislature and con- 
sign to it unbridled control over our 
liberty and our property. It is this 
condition which the Referendum will 
cure by giving the whole people 
final control over their laws. 

Very properly Mr. Ralston reminds 
his fellow citizens that nobody cares 
much, one way or the other, about 
the vast majority of laws proposed 
or enacted by a given legislature; 
but about some one special law that 
does affect the people, they should 
be able to exercise this control. He 
believes that many legislatures enact 
improper laws because they are 
ignorant of what the real desire of a 
majority of the people is. Some 
faction makes a great noise, and the 
majority fails to express its views. 
All this would be corrected by the 
existence of the Referendum. In 
conclusion he writes wisely, as fol- 
lows : 

The people, taken as a whole, have 
no axes to grind so far as legislation 
is concerned. They do not put selfish 
desires into bills and haunt the halls 
of the General Assembly until those 
bills become law. When laws, passed 
in the interest of a particular class or 
section of the community, are submit- 
ted to the whole community, the in- 
terests' of everybody are so different 
from the interests of the few who ob- 
tain special privileges by their perti- 
nacity at Annapolis, that they will 
take away thos"e special privileges 
through the Referendum before they 
become hardened into vested interests. 

"Will the people use wisely this pow- 
er if they have it in , their hands? A 
short answer will be that this is* a 
government of the people, and the 



people are entitled to act wisely or 
unwisely, as they may see fit, and that 
they are themselves the sufferers' from 
their own unwisdom, and have means 
of correcting it. But experience, fort- 
unately, enables us to say that we 
have nothing to fear from the un- 
wisdom of the people if they are al- 
lowed to exercise the Referendum. 

In a personal letter to the editor 
of Equity, Mr. Ralston says: "We 
feel very confident of the adoption 
of the Referendum amendment next 
fall, and are now most concerned that 
it shall receive the approval of a 
large majority of our voters." 

Massachusetts 

Although the annual session of the 
'General Court" of Massachusetts 
has not yet adjourned at the time 
this is written, it is reasonably cer- 
tain that no important forward step 
is to be expected from it. Both the 
bill for a constitutional convention 
and the Initiative and Referendum 
proposal have been rejected by the 
Republican majority. 

The constitutional convention bill 
was again strongly recommended by 
Governor Walsh, and a public hearing 
was accorded to the Initiative and 
Referendum amendment, but the 
forces of reaction were still too 
strong to be influenced by the admin- 
istration or by the Democratic and 
Progressive leaders. By taking ad- 
vantage of a technicality in the rules 
of procedure, the Republicans avoid- 
ed a record vote on the Initiative and 
Referendum proposition, notwith- 
standing the 3 to 1 affirmative vote 
at the last election in the nine repre- 
sentative districts where that propo- 
sition, was submitted under the Pub- 
lic Opinion act. 

The proposition to change the 
Massachusetts plan of elections from 
annual to biennial elections was de- 
feated in the House by the vote of 
147 to 65. 



118 



Equity 



The report of the Recess Commit- 
tee on city charters recommended 
four types of government, from 
which the cities of the state might 
choose. They are in substance as 
follows: 

Plan A. — A mayor and council of 
nine, to be elected at large, and the 
mayor to have absolute power in ap- 
pointment, removal and veto. 

Plan B. — A mayor and council of 
fifteen, one from each ward and the 
rest at large; mayor to have power 
of appointment, and removal, subject 
to approval of the city council, and 
veto. 

Plan C. — A commission of five, 
one of whom shall be mayor, and all 
to be elected for two years each. 

Plan D. — A mayor and four council- 
men empowered to choose a city 
manager. 

It is noteworthy that none of these 
four plans include provision for the 
old-style, bi-cameral system, still 
generally in vogue. Pursuant to the 
foregoing report, a bill approving of 
these four forms of municipal gov- 
ernment and authorizing municipal- 
ities to choose from them has been 
favorably reported in the Senate. 

Both houses of the legislature for 
a second time have adopted the 
measure to submit the woman suf- 
frage amendment to the voters next 
November, and that measure will 
therefore go on the ballot at that 
time. 

The first recall election in New 
England was held at Salem, Mass., 
on December 29, 1914, when by the 
vote of 3465 to 2629 Mayor John F. 
Hurley was removed from office on 
the charge of not having enforced 
the liquor laws properly. In his 
place Matthias J. O'Keefe, a leather 
manufacturer, who was the candi- 
date of the Better Government As- 
sociation, was elected. Hurley had 
served four one-year terms as mayor. 



Minnesota 



The voters of Minnesota are de- 
termined to have the Initiative and 
Referendum in their constitution in 
spite of the absurd and unjust barrier 
to its admission, namely, the require- 
ment that amendments must receive 
a majority of all the votes cast for 
candidates at a given election in or- 
der to be adopted. Last November 
the I. and R. amendment was favored 
by a 4 to 1 majority of those voting 
on that proposition. For the amend- 
ment 162,951 votes were cast, and 
opposing it there were 47,906'; but 
in spite of this, the amendment was 
rejected because a majority of those 
voting for candidates did not vote in 
favor of the amendment, those not 
voting on the amendment being 
counted against it! 

The present legislature in all prob- 
ability will submit another I. and R. 
amendment. At the time we write 
such an amendment is under consid- 
eration in the Senate, after having 
passed the House by a vote of 106 
to 12. But as to its final form we 
cannot now speak, as several amend- 
ments to the bill as originally intro- 
duced by Representative Bjorge are 
under consideration. As introduced, 
it provided for the constitutional 
Initiative on basis of 10 per cent of 
the electors, provided that an amend- 
ment be approved by at least 60 per 
cent of those voting thereon. This 
percentage was raised in the Senate 
to 66 2-3 ! The measure was also 
amended in the Senate so as to sub- 
stitute the indirect constitutional 
Initiative for the direct, with the pro- 
vision that an amendment to the con- 
stitution must receive an affirmative 
vote of four-sevenths of those voting 
thereon, and that the total vote shall 
not be less than three-sevenths of the 
votes cast at the election. 

The statutory Initiative was made 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



119 



available on the indirect plan by the 
demand of 2 per cent of the voters; 
but if a measure so proposed be not 
enacted, or if it be amended by the 
legislature, then upon a further peti- 
tion, signed by 6 per cent of the 
electors, the law as first proposed 
shall be submitted at the next gen- 
eral election, when it would be 
adopted by the approval of a major- 
ity of those voting thereon. It was 
provided that no law thus approved 
by the electors should be subject to 
the veto of the governor. 

The Referendum in this bill was 
based upon the demand of 6 per cent 
of the electors, and a measure so re- 
ferred to the people would be repeal- 
ed by a majority of the votes cast 
thereon; but if a referendum peti- 
tion should be signed by 15 per cent 
of the voters, the law or part of law 
thus assailed would be suspended, 
pending the referendum vote thereon. 
A two-thirds vote of each house on 
any measure puts it entirely beyond 
the Referendum — not the usual emer- 
gency provision, for in other states 
an emergency measure can be refer- 
red, but goes immediately into effect, 
subject to the referendum vote when 
it occurs. This Minnesota provision 
would make every law an emergency 
law in the ordinary sense unless it 
be referred by a 15 per cent petition, 
and would make a measure passed 
by a two-thirds vote an emergency 
measure in an extraordinary sense, 
in that it would be entirely and for- 
ever beyond the Referendum. 

As prepared, the signing of peti- 
tions was to be "verified before a 
person authorized to administer 
oath," and the form of the petition 
would be such that a signer by the 
act of signing declares the date of 
signature, residence, qualification and 
knowledge of contents. Also the 
person in whose presence a petition 



would be signed must make affidavit 
as to the number of signers and the 
correctness of the signatures. 

The provision as to distribution of 
signers was not bad. It required 
that not less than half of the neces- 
sary percentage of voters should be 
obtained in at least ten counties. A 
new and rather good feature was 
that which permitted that voters who 
have signed the first part of an 
initiative petition shall be qualified 
also to sign the second petition^ In 
the event of proceedings against any 
petition, the burden was made to fall 
upon the person attacking the peti- 
tion. This was as it should be. 

Representative Bjornson was the* 
author of a bill proposing a consti- 
tutional convention. Senator Dux- 
bury introduced a bill proposing an 
amendment to the constitution reduc- 
ing the membership of both houses 
of the legislature. By this amend- 
ment the Senate would be reduced 
from 67 to 35, and the House from 
131 to 75. 

Nebraska 

The lower house of the Nebraska 
legislature on February 28 adopted 
the Norton bill, providing for the 
submission of a Recall amendment. 
We have not yet been able to obtain 
the text of this measure, but from 
a report in the Omaha Bee we learn 
that it would apply to appointed as 
well as to elected officials, and also 
to the judiciary. The percentage of 
petition signers was fixed at 25, 
which is according to the custom in 
some states. One commendable pro- 
vision was that no officer could be 
recalled until he should have served 
six months of his term. Another is 
that an officer against whom Recall 
proceedings had been started should 
have five days grace in which to re- 
sign before any steps could be taken 
toward holding an election. If he 



120 



Equity 



should fail to resign, a special elec- 
tion >must be called within thirty 
days. At the Recall election the 
vote would be taken on the Recall 
question alone. That is, it would 
not include the election of a suc- 
cessor. In case of a vacancy, the 
place would be filled in the manner 
provided by law. 

Nevada 
The work of the recent session of 
the lawmakers at Carson City includ- 
ed four measures worthy of mention 
in this record. One was an act en- 
abling any county to demand a Refer- 
endum on any law concerning it 
alone, provided that 20 per cent of 
the voters of said county petition for 
it: another law permitting munici- 
palities to adopt the commission gov- 
ernment. Two others regulate pri- 
mary and general elections. 

New Jersey 

The legislature at Trenton is near- 
ing its end with many of its more 
important measures still undeter- 
mined as our report for this issue 
closes. Among these measures, the 
only one of particular interest as 
bearing upon improvements in gov- 
ernment is known as the Hutchinson 
Home Rule bill, proposing an amend- 
ment to the constitution empowering 
the voters of every municipality to 
determine and alter their form of 
government in any manner that suits 
them, provided it is not inconsistent 
with the constitution of the state or 
of the nation. 

This broad measure of home rule 
was opposed at every stage by the 
"big lawyers" in the legislature, who 
represent the great public utility cor- 
porations. These men referred to 
the measure as "populism run wild." 
They had let this measure get past 
the preceding legislature without 



paying much attention to it, but now 
they appear to have awakened to its 
import as containing elements of 
danger to "special privilege." 

Already two constitutional amend- 
ments have won their place upon this 
year's ballot by a second enactment 
at the hands of the present legisla- 
ture. One; is the woman suffrage 
proposition, and the other the Hen- 
nessy resolution, providing for an 
easier method of amending the con- 
stitution. Referring to the latter 
proposition, we have the privilege of 
publishing the following letter from 
its author, Senator Hennessy: 

NEW JERSEY SENATE 

Trenton, March 22nd, 1915. 
Mr. Edwin S. Potter, Associate Editor, 
"Equity," 1520 Chestnut Street, 
Philadelphia, Penna. 
Dear Sir: 

Answering your letter of March 15th 
would say: 

Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 2, 
which I introduced last year and 
which was passed by the 1914 legisla- 
ture, has again been passed by the 
legislature at its pres'ent session and 
will now be submitted to the people 
of the state at a special election in 
September, at which the equal suffrage 
amendment and possibly other amend- 
ments to the constitution will be sub- 
mitted. I have long contended for a 
constitutional convention in New Jer- 
sey that will give the people an op- 
portunity to deal adequately and 
deliberately with all needful amend- 
ments to the fundamental law, and in 
1913 I introduced a constitutional con- 
vention bill in the House of Assembly 
which passed that body but was de- 
feated in the Senate. There is, it 
seems, no possibility of getting a con- 
vention bill through, because of the 
opposition of the smaller counties in 
the state, whose people fear that they 
might, in a general constitutional 
revision, lose the balance of power 
which they now hold in the legisla- 
ture by virtue of the constitutional 
provision giving one Senator to each 
county irrespective of population. It 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



121 



would appear, therefore, that the only- 
promise of a constitutional reform re- 
sides in the slow process of separate 
amendment, and the amendment which 
has just passed the legislature will 
make it somewhat easier for the peo- 
ple to deal with the constitution by 
providing-, in substance, that the legis- 
lature may initiate a constitutional 
amendment at any session instead of 
once in five years as provided in the 
present constitution. The proposed 
amendment must, as at present, pass 
two sessions of the legislature and 
then be ratified by popular vote. 
Yours very truly, 
Charles O'Coxnor Hhnnessy. 
The city of Hoboken on February 
9 held a special election, at which 
for the third time the question of 
adopting the commission form of 
government, with the Initiative and 
Referendum under the Walsh act, 
was submitted to the voters. At the 
two previous elections the proposition 
failed, but this time by the bare ma- 
jority of three votes it carried; and 
this important city is now added to 
the long list of New Jersey munici- 
palities which are governed on the 
commission plan. 

New York 

Coming as it did on the eve of the 
assembling of the constitutional 
convention at Albany, the 1915 ses- 
sion of the New York legislature was 
largely overshadowed, and some sub- 
jects which undoubtedly would have 
figured in its legislation were defer- 
red in view of the impending action 
of the more important body. 

A curious illustration of the oper- 
ation of the two-chambered system 
of lawmaking was presented in con- 
nection with a proposition to insert 
the Initiative and Recall provisions 
in the new commission charter of 
Buffalo, which, as adopted by the 
voters at the November election, had 
provided only for Referendum. A bill 



for this purpose, introduced by Mr. 
Keeney, was adopted by the House 
by a very large majority; but in the 
Senate, the Republican majority act- 
ed as a barrier to its further pro- 
gress. In the Senate a bill was in- 
troduced by Senator iWra. H. Hill, on 
request of the Chamber of Commerce 
of Binghamton, providing that the 
voters of that city might determine 
for themselves whether they wanted 
to incorporate the Initiative, Refer- 
endum and Recall in their charter or 
not. The Republican senators held a 
caucus, and voted by a large major- 
ity against considering any measure 
providing for the Referendum. By 
this action, the effort to amend the 
optional city charter bill, so as to 
enable cities to decide for themselves 
whether they want the I. R. and R., 
also was barred from consideration 
at this session. 

The absurdity of the position taken 
by the Republican caucus is uncon- 
sciously presented in the newspaper 
report which says that "the caucus 
further considered the questions, and 
overwhelmingly voted not to permit 
cities of the state to vote on the 
proposition of incorporating in their 
charters either the Recall or the Ref- 
erendum." Thus did this responsible 
legislative majority take its stand 
squarely against the fundamental 
principle of home rule for cities. They 
were unwilling to trust the voters in 
the different cities of the state to 
decide for themselves the form of 
their own local government. How 
long will the intelligent citizenship 
of the great Empire state tolerate 
this sort of government? 

A later appeal for the privilege of 
adopting safeguards for the commis- 
sion government plan was made be- 
fore the Senate Committee on Cities, 
March 30, by a delegation of Bing- 



122 



Equity 



hamton citizens. The spokesman of 
this delegation said that the people 
of Binghamton were ready to adopt 
the commission-manager plan, but 
did not think they would do so un- 
less they were free to include the 
Initiative, Referendum and Recall as 
checks or safeguards. One of the 
members quoted a recent speech of 
Senator Root, in which he said that 
conditions had outgrown our govern- 
mental machinery, and that govern- 
ments should be made more respon- 
sive. When asked by a senator if the 
proposal to include these safeguards 
was not a proposition to change our 
representative form of government, 
a delegate replied that more than 
8,000,000 people in this country are 
now living under the commission 
form, including these popular checks, 
and that it could hardly be said that 
they did not have a representative 
form of government. 

Ohio 

A leaf has just been inserted in 
the book of experience for Cincinnati, 
which might be studied with great 
advantage by the citizens of Phila- 
delphia and a number of other cities 
where irresponsive and machine-con- 
trolled councils still hold sway. On 
March 9 a special election was held 
in Cincinnati which contains the les- 
son referred to. The election was 
called under the Referendum pro- 
vision of that city's charter to en- 
able the voters to say whether or not 
they approved of a new twenty-five 
year street railway franchise to con- 
nect the city with Kentucky suburbs. 
This franchise had been rushed 
through the Cincinnati councils with- 
out paying heed to numerous pro- 
tests from the people, and was of 
the kind that gives little protection 
to the interests of the city. The 



People's Power League, under the 
leadership of Herbert S. Bigelow, 
had started the petition for a Refer- 
endum on this ordinance, expecting 
that enough signatures would be got 
to refer it to the regular election in 
November; and on account of the ex- 
tra expense of a special election, no 
effort was made by that League to 
get the 20 per cent, of the voters 
necessary to demand a special elec- 
tion. 

But apparently the traction forces 
were so confident of their ability to 
obtain the support of a majority of 
the voters, in view of the supposed 
wave of reaction since last year's 
election, that they went ahead and 
got enough signatures to the petition 
to compel a special election, which 
was held on the date above mention- 
ed. 

The defenders of the franchise used 
money freely to get their case before 
the people in the form of advertise- 
ments and bill-board posters, and 
also by numerous public meetings; 
but despite all this, and to their 
great surprise, the election resulted 
in the defeat of the franchise ordin- 
ance of 9,000 votes out of a total vote 
considerably below that recorded at 
the last general election. These facts 
speak for themselves. Let other 
cities which have not yet obtained 
the Referendum or the Initiative 
take notice. 

Oklahoma 

On pages 53 and 54 of the January 
Equity, we presented a report and 
table concerning the result of the 
November election as to measures 
voted on, which included four ini- 
tiative amendments to the constitu- 
tion; but by some oversight the in- 
formation therein was incomplete, 
the total vote for governor and per- 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



123 



centage of votes cast on measures 
being omitted. 

Referring now to the official state- 
ment sent to this office by the State 
Election Board, it appears that the 
total of votes cast for all candidates 
for governor was 252,087, and the 
number of votes cast for each of 
the four amendments submitted 
ranged from 66 to 69 per cent of the 
total for governor. All of the four 
amendments received a considerable 
majority of the votes cast thereon, 
one of them nearly a 2 to 1 majority. 
But owing to the requirement in this 
state constitution that initiative 
measures, whether statutory or con- 
stitutional, must receive a majority 
of all votes cast at the election in or- 
der to be adopted, all of the proposed 
measures were defeated. It may be 
well to mention in this connection 
that the Oklahoma constitution makes 
a distinction in favor of referendum 
measures by requiring that in such 
cases, only a majority of all the 
votes cast thereon be required for 
an adoption. Evidently the people 
of this state are finding from exper- 
ience the unreasonableness of the 
"majority of all" requirement, and 
it is to be hoped that in due time 
they will improve their constitution 
in this respect. 

Pennsylvania 

The people of the great Keystone 
state have been getting very warm 
in their effort to impress their elected 
representatives in the legislature 
with the importance of a number of 
different matters of public concern 
since the session began last January. 
This laborious and somewhat emo- 
tional wig-wagging still goes on, but 
it may be doubted if the legislators 
have any means of knowing con- 
clusively what the actual majority 



opinion of the people is on any sub- 
ject. 

In another part of this issue, we 
have discussed editorially at some 
length the very remarkable effort of 
the local optionists to get their ideas 
before the legislature. Elsewhere wo 
have also touched upon the efforts of 
the railroads to induce the law- 
makers to repeal the Full Crew law. 

Still another and very important 
movement, which has been brought 
to the attention of the legislature 
through many columns of newspaper 
editorials and interviews with prom- 
inent citizens, is the proposal to call 
a consitutional convention for the 
purpose of revising and improving 
the fundamental law of the state. A 
bill for this purpose has been intro- 
duced in the House, known as the 
Roney bill; but up to this time it has 
reposed serenely in the Judiciary 
Committee, and there is no present 
indication of its being reported for 
action. A number of bills have been 
introduced affecting in minor details 
the operation of the commission gov- 
ernment law for third-class cities, 
but to this time no one of them has 
been enacted. 

The expensiveness of the plan of 
advertising proposed constitutional 
amendments in the newspapers was 
brought to the attention of the pub- 
lic by a bill appropriating $46,000 to 
pay for such advertising in the last 
two years. This bill was passed, but 
was vetoed by Governor Brumbaugh 
as representing exorbitant charges. 

The one important act of the legis- 
lature so far, as affecting the funda- 
mental law, is the bill to submit the 
woman suffrage amendment at the 
state election in November. 

Rhode Island 

Even that conservative little New 
England state, first settled by liberty 



124 



Equity 



loving Roger Williams, shows signs 
of awakening to the need of constitu- 
tional revision. A commission, which 
was appointed three years ago by the 
legislature of Rhode Island to report 
on possible improvements in the con- 
stitution of that state, submitted its 
report to the legislature on January 
22. 

Among the recommendations con- 
tained in this report are: The removal 
of the property qualification for the 
elective franchise; the limitation of 
the power of the legislature to enact 
laws affecting the government of 
municipalities unless approved by a 
majority of the voters thereof, and 
authorizing cities to adopt, alter or 
amend their charters; the governor 
to appoint all state officers by and 
with the advice and consent of the 
Senate; the legislature to meet in 
biennial sessions. 

One of the most important changes 
recommended by this commission 
concerns the amendment of the con- 
stitution. At present a proposed 
amendment must be approved by two 
successive assemblies, and ratified by 
a three-fifths vote of the electors 
voting thereon. As proposed by the 
commission, an amendment to be 
adopted would require the affirma- 
ative vote of two-thirds of the mem- 
bers of each house, and an affirma- 
tive majority of the electors voting 
thereon. Provision would also be 
made requiring the question of con- 
stitutional revision to be submitted 
to the people in 1920, and every 
twentieth year thereafter. 

In spite of this stimulating report, 
there has been no sign of a serious 
intention to act upon it by the Re- 
publican majority in control of the 
1915 legislature. Up to the time of 
this writing, no action has been taken 
looking to constitutional revision. 



South Dakota 



And now the voters of the state 
which was the first to adopt the 
Initiative and Referendum (in 1898) 
are to have an opportunity to say 
whether they will have a convention 
to revise their constitution. A meas- 
ure submitting the question of call- 
ing such a convention at the 1916 
general election has been authorized 
by the legislature. Many friends of 
the Initiative and Referendum in 
South Dakota favor the calling of a 
convention in the expectation that 
the Initiative and Referendum sec- 
tion may be improved. 

H. L. Loucks, who was one of the 
leaders in obtaining the I. and R. 
amendment in South Dakota, in a 
signed statement to the Watertown, 
S. D., Public Opinion, calls attention 
to the fact that the Supreme Court 
has greatly weakened the South Da- 
kota Referendum by holding that any 
law receiving a two-thirds vote of 
the legislature is protected from the 
Referendum by the emergency clause. 
Mr. Loucks also says that opponents 
of popular government have attacked 
the Initiative by having the legisla- 
ture pass a law making it almost 
impossible to secure enough signa- 
tures to a petition to initiate any 
measure. Mr. Loucks deplores the 
fact that the Recall was not included 
in the original amendment to the 
constitution; and it is hoped that 
this instrument may be included, if a 
convention is called to revise the 
present constitution. 

One of the other important acts 
of the 1915 session was the passage 
of a new primary law to supersede 
the law initiated and adopted by the 
voters. Thus the legislature has 
taken it into its own hands to revise 
the action of the sovereign people. 
The new primary law is inferior to 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



125 



the old. It does not provide for pres- 
idential primaries, or for preferential 
voting. Some I. and R. amendments 
forbid amendment or repeal by the 
legislature of a law made directly 
by the voters. This we consider too 
drastic. However, the legislature 
should not be permitted by a mere 
majority to change or repeal a law 
made by the voters. At least a three- 
fourths majority of the membership 
of both houses should be required to 
do this. The South Dakota amend- 
ment, being the first one in this 
country, was defective in this as well 
as in other respects. If a constitu- 
tional convention is held, these imper- 
fections will doubtless be removed. 
To get on the ballot, a person must 
obtain signatures to his nominating 
petition numbering not less than 1 
per cent nor more than 3 per cent of 
the party to which the petitioners 
belong. 

Acting upon a recommendation in 
the message of Governor Byrne, the 
legislature on March 5 voted to sub- 
mit a constitutional amendment al- 
lowing classification of property for 
taxation, and also allowing the legis- 
lature to levy an income tax. An- 
other amendment to be voted on in 
1916 is state-wide prohibition. 

Utah 

Note: The passage of a bill sub- 
mitting to the voters an I. and R. 
amendment to the constitution of 
Utah by the 1915 legislature is dis- 
cussed at length in the Editorial Sec- 
tion of this issue, entitled "Inelas- 
ticity of the Initiative." (See page 91) 

Washington 

The old but ever true saying that 
"eternal vigilance is the price of 
liberty" is just now forcibly illus- 
trated to the liberty loving citizens 
of the state of Washington by the 



course of the recent session of the 
legislature, which was controlled by 
a group of reactionaries, elected as 
Republicans. Over the veto of Gov- 
ernor Lister, this legislature passed 
House Bills 120 and 178 and Senate 
Bill 229, which if they go into effect, 
will virtually destroy the Initiative 
and Referendum and the direct pri- 
mary system of this state. Several 
other measures, objectionable to the 
progressive elements in all the par- 
ties, were also enacted; and on the 
very day of adjournment the word 
was sent forth to every corner of the 
state warning the people of the im- 
pending danger. The concerted move- 
ment, headed by the Joint Legislative 
Committee of the Federation of 
Labor, Farmers' Union and State 
Grange, co-operating with the Pro- 
gressive and Democratic party lead- 
ers, was immediately put on foot, 
looking to the circulation of referen- 
dum petitions against these objection- 
able legislative acts. 

House Bill No. 120 requires that 
voters desiring to sign I. and R. 
petitions, whether in city or country 
districts, must sign them in registra- 
tion offices and before a registration 
officer. House Bill 178 would make 
it a gross misdemeanor for anyone 
to solicit or attempt to induce anyone 
to sign a petition within one hundred 
feet of the entrance of a registration 
office. Senate Bill 229 would restore 
the caucus-primary-convention, under 
which candidates would be compelled 
to promise support of the party plat- 
forms made by the machine-controlled 
convention. It would also eliminate 
independent candidates by legalizing 
the power of party committees to 
name candidates. 

Under the existing I. and R. section 
of the constitution, these measures 
cannot go into effect for ninety 



126 



Equity 



days; and petitions for Referendum 
are now being circulated throughout 
the state. Miss Lucy R. Case, the 
Executive Secretary of 'the Labor- 
Grange Committee, in a signed state- 
ment accompanying the referendum 
blank, says: *Reme;mber it is the 
principle of Direct Legislation that 
is again on trial; failure to refer 
these measures will be its death 
blow." Appended to this appeal is a 
significant analysis of the 1914 vote 
under the heading, "Is Direct Legis- 
lation a Failure ? " Figures given show 
that the percentage of the total vote 
cast for United States senators was 
90, and that the percentage vote on 
all initiated measures was 91. Fol- 
lowing this is given the figures show- 
ing that the vote on the "Five Sis- 
ters" bills was uniformly higher than 
•the vote for different successful can- 
didates, thus disproving the assertion 
that the people are not interested in 
measures. The work of circulating 
the referendum petitions is now re- 
stricted by the law prohibiting pay- 
ment for such circulation. This 
means that all the work must be 
done by volunteers in their own 
time. 

A. W. Davis, progressive state 
chairman, declares that House Bill 
120, in effect and in intent, abolishes 
the Referendum. He calls attention 
to the conservatism with which the 
people used these instruments in 
1914, and declares that the Repub- 
lican legislature has misrepresented 
the voters who created it. He urges 
concentration of effort to secure the 
Referendum on this bill. The caucus 
of Democratic members at Olympia 
took similar action, looking toward 
a Referendum on that bill. It surely 
is impossible that the voters of 
Washington, who in 1912 almost un- 
animously adopted the Initiative and 



Referendum, will now tamely submit 
to this virtual abolishment of these 
instruments of popular control. 

***** 

<We are requested by the Municipal 
League of Seattle to announce that 
they desire to have representative 
men address their weekly meetings, 
and to say that they would be glad 
to have speakers from the east who 
may be passing through Seattle 
introduce themselves to the officers 
of the League, which is located in 
the Central Building. Mr. Malcolm 
Douglas is chairman of the Program 
Committee, and to him communica- 
tions should be addressed. 

West Virginia 

Governor Hatfield, in his message 
to the 1915 legislature, surprised 
some of his former critics by taking 
a progressive stand on several mat- 
ters of great public importance, 
among which may be mentioned a 
primary election law, corrupt prac- 
tices and the Initiative, Referendum 
and Recall. Of the I. R. and R., the 
governor said that they are ''safety 
devices in the hands of the people, 
giving them an effectual remedy in 
protecting their inalienable rights, as 
guaranteed under the law of the 
land." Further, he declared that if 
these instruments were operative in 
West Virginia, "they would afford 
effectual methods in assuring a 
healthy local, town and city govern- 
ment." 

Notwithstanding this earnest ad- 
monition from the governor of the 
state, the West Virginia legislators 
failed to pay heed to it. A primary 
bill was passed which calls for the 
election of delegates to national con- 
ventions by the primary instead of 
by the convention method. 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



127 



Wyoming 

Here is another case where a pro- 
posed Initiative and Referendum 
amendment to the constitution of a 
state has failed of passage through 
the legislature without causing any 
regrets on the part of the friends of 
popular government. A bill to sub- 
mit an Initiative iand Referendum 
amendment received in the House the 
following vote: aye 35, no 15, absent 
7, This being less than the required 
two-thirds majority, the measure was 
lost. As introduced this bill was 
not so bad a proposition; but when 
the amenders got through with it, it 
was entirely worthless as a practical 
measure for the use of the voters. 
The percentage of petition signers to 
invoke the Initiative, which was 10 
per cent of the legal voters in the 
original bill, was raised to 35 per 
cent by amendment. But in addition 
to this, the provision was added that 
a petition must be signed in the 
office of and in the presence of a duly 
authorized official, while the circula- 
tion of petitions by anyone would be 
prohibited. The percentage of peti- 
tion signers for the Referendum, 
which was 12 per cent in the original 
bill, although that is higher than the 
customary figure, was also raised to 
35 per cent. To become a law, an 
initiated measure would have had to 
obtain a majority of the votes cast 
thereon, provided not less than one- 
third of the total vote cast was re- 
corded in the affirmative; but the 
amenders raised this minimum to 
two-thirds of the total vote for candi- 
dates, which is beyond reason. A 
constitutional amendment was to 
have a majority of the electors "vot- 
ing at such election" in order to be- 
come a part of the constitution. But 
this severe requirement was made 
still more severe, even ridiculous, by 
an amendment specifying a two- 



thirds majority of all votes cast for 
candidates, for enactment. 

Another bill which passed the 
Senate by a vote of 23 to 4 was in- 
definitely postponed in the House. 
This bill was amended out of all 
reason, altho it was not of much 
value in the first place. The percen- 
tage of signers for the Initiative 
was raised from 20 to 35, and the 
provision was inserted that petitions 
must be secured in each county of 
the state. The Referendum percent- 
age wag similarly raised from 10 
to 35 per cent, and distribution in 
each county required. For enactment, 
measures would have to obtain a 
majority of "all the votes cast at an 
election." 

These two bills form excellent ex- 
amples of the kind of Initiative and 
Referendum which would be worse 
than nothing to the voters of a state. 
They afford an excellent example of 
what ought not to be done, and what 
no body of intelligent voters ought 
to accept under any circumstances. 



Book Reviews 



"Direct Legislation in Iowa." By J. 
Van der Zee, of the State Historical 
Society of Iowa; and published by 
this* Society, at Iowa City, Iowa. 
71 pages. 

This pamphlet is reprinted from 
Vol. II of the "Iowa Applied History 
Series." It is a record of the uses of 
Referendum in Iowa, and a clear 
statement of the arguments for and 
against the state-wide Initiative and 
Referendum, which Iowa has not yet 
achieved. The above mentioned series 
is edited by Benjamin F. Shambaugh. 
In his "Editor's Introduction" to this 
pamphlet this significant sentence 
occurs: 

This much is certain: the principle 
of popular control will not be snuffed 



128 



Equity 



out because the newer methods of its 
expression, like new toys, are at first 
overworked. 

And in the "Author's Preface" we 
find this: 

Furthermore, in the light of exper- 
ience in other Commonwealths it ap- 
pears that direct legislation in mat- 
ters of State-wide importance is fast 
coming to be recognized as an indis- 
pensable feature of popular govern- 
ment. 

On page 15 the author remarks: 
Ever since 1778 the people of Amer- 
ica have been familiar with the prac- 
tice of referring State constitutions 
and constitutional amendments to the 
voters. Indeed, America is the home 
of the referendum as regards consti- 
tutional law. 

It is gratifying to learn (p. 23) 
that "as far back as 1840 the people 
of the several counties of the terri- 
tory of Iowa were given the right to 
vote on the subject of township 
organization and also to express 
their preference for township names. 
* * * Since 1851 a great many mat- 
ters have been referred to the people 
of the county, not only at regular 
elections but also at special elections 
called for the purpose." 

These are examples of the local 
use of the Referendum in Iowa since 
very early times. Everybody knows 
that the "Des Moines plan of city 
government," which has been so wide- 
ly copied all over the country in re- 
cent years consists of the union of 
the Initiative, Referendum and Re- 
call with the commission form of 
government. Thus it will be seen 
that trusting the people in local af- 
fairs has not only been in vogue in 
Iowa for a very long time, but that 
the fame of Iowa in this respect has 
become widespread through the "Des 
Moines plan." Now we hope that the 
legislature of Iowa will permit the 
voters of that splendid state to vote 
on a constitutional amendment pro- 



viding for the state-wide Initiative 
and Referendum. 



"Where the People Rule; or the Ini- 
tiative and Referendum, Direct Pri- 
mary Law and the Recall in Use in 
the State of Oregon." By Gilbert L. 
Hedges; B. A., LL. B., 204 pages and 
index. Published by the Bender- 
Moss Co., San Francisco, Cal. 
Price, $2.50. 

After all the books and magazine 
articles that have appeared on the 
subject of advanced self government 
in Oregon, one wonders why another 
book should appear on this subject. 
The book itself does not answer this 
question satisfactorily. Most of such 
publications are for propaganda pur- 
poses, either for or against the Ore- 
gon methods. This book is an evi- 
dent attempt at neutral and colorless 
presentation of the facts, tho here 
and there an evidence of lack of 
sympathy occurs, except on page 92, 
where decided praise of the results 
of the direct primary law occurs. 

The history, analysis and results 
in practice of these improved meth- 
ods are clearly and tersely given, 
followed by the state constitution 
with notes (consisting of 55 pages). 
Thus the book contains much im- 
portant information concerning gov- 
ernment in Oregon. 

A curious sample of reasoning 
occurs on page 113. The author here 
speaks of the efforts to abolish the 
Senate, and says: "Should the State 
Senate be abolished the next step 
will be the elimination of the House 
of Representatives." Hes deems to 
think that the desire of those who 
wish to abolish the Senate is to 
abolish the legislature altogether and 
make all legislation direct. The au- 
thor here has made a great mistake. 
It is not the wish of those in Oregon 
who seek to abolish the Senate to also 
abolish representative legislation. 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



129 



Their aim is to establish a single 
house instead of the double house. 
Many municipalities have given up 
the double house system and placed 
both legislative and executive author- 
ity in the hands of a small commis- 
sion. The success of this movement 
is generally known, and many think- 
ers believe that the government of 
states can be vastly improved by 
taking at least a hint from the exper- 
ience of the many municipalities that 
have made the above mentioned 
change in their plan of government. 



"The Unseen Empire," a peace play 
in four acts. By Atherton Brown- 
ell. Published by Harper & Broth- 
ers, New York. Price, $1.25. 

The author of this timely and im- 
pressive drama says in his foreword 
that its purpose is to represent "the 
new internationalism;" and the work 
will bear out his statement. The 
situation developed is that of Europe 
on the eve of the outbreak of a world 
war, and the action centers around 
the great German gun works. The 
proprietorship had been left by will 
to the daughter of their founder, cor- 
responding to the well known inherit- 
ance of the Krupp gun works fortune 
by the daughter of Herr Krupp. Into 
the plot, with its thread of a pleas- 
ing love story, is woven a most im- 
pressive statement of the interna- 
tional peace propaganda; and when 
the war is about to break, these in- 
fluences induce the woman owner of 
the gun works to deliberately put the 
entire plant out of commission at the 
same time that the American am- 
bassador brings to bear the formal 
threat of his government that if 
Germany should refuse to accept 
mediation, all financial and business 
dealings between her and the United 
States would be stopped. By reason 
of these tremendous and unexpected 



forces for peace, the war is averted* 
The plot of this play has been alter- 
ed for stage production in such a way 
(that the sa^me forces which were 
first used to prevent a world war are 
now employed to end the war, and 
bring about an international power 
sufficient to establish the peace of the 
world on a permanent basis. 



"Analysis of the Popular Vote on Con- 
stitutional and Legislative Propos- 
als in the General Election of 1914, 
a supplement to The New Republic" 
(issue of March 16). By Robert E. 
Cushman. 

The editors of the New Republic 
deserve the hearty commendation of 
all sincere friends of popular gov- 
ernment for their publication of Mr. 
Oushman's highly illuminating study 
of the results of the election of last 
November in relation to the measures 
voted on in the different states. The 
editors of this serious newcomer in 
the ranks of our national weeklies, 
say that they had this investigation 
made and published in the hope of 
bringing this subject of direct popu- 
lar voting on measures to the atten- 
tion of a -more general class of 
readers" than the readers of technic- 
al magazines, such as Equity. The 
editors recognize that since the last 
election many people are inclined to 
think that direct control of govern- 
ment is on the wane; but it is point- 
ed out that no one can prove that the 
direct processes are on the wane and 
that a larger participation by the 
electorate in the actual work of gov- 
ernment is "the natural consumma- 
tion of three generations of state 
political development" and that such 
participation is "necessary to the 
vitality of a thoroughly democratic 
system and to the wholesome popu- 
larization of a program of social 



130 



Equity 



legislation."' They declare thatj "a 
measure of direct government is nec- 
essary in order to bring home to the 
people the extent and the importance 
of their ultimate political responsi- 
bility;" that the sense of responsi- 
bility and the ability to use political 
power are strengthened more by the 
exercise of authority than by the dele- 
gation of it to representatives; hence 
that the conclusive argument in favor 
of the direct control of government 
"is consequently educational." 

Mr. Cushman's first step is to 
analyze the "origin of proposals" in 
a table so as to show the number of 
amendments and statutes in each 
state which were due to act of legis- 
latures and the number credited to 
the Initiative. He makes various 
interesting groupings of the measures 
according to territory and character 
and also a complete list of the vot- 
ings by states, most of which is 
familiar to the readers of Equity. 
But the analysis is of very great value 
to all persons who are seriously con- 
cerned about the success of our na- 
tion's great experiment in self gov- 
ernment. 



'"Progressive Democracy." By Herbert 
Croly, author of "The Promise of 
American Life," etc.; 430 pages and 
index. Price, $2.00 net. Published 
by the Macmillan Co., New York. 

This is an exceedingly clear and 
critical analysis of past, present and 
prospective political systems in this 
country. It is preeminently a book 
for the student rather than for the 
popular reader. It cannot be read 
without close attention, and it stirs 
deep thought. The dominant polit- 
ical creeds and practices are laid 
open as with a sharp knife. The new 
proposals are as keenly dissected. 
Much of the time the reader wonders 
if the author really indorses any 



theory of government. The Recall 
(pages 325-327) is the one develop- 
ment in government that receives his 
unqualified indorsement. 

His treatment of the Initiative and 
Referendum (beginning on page 303) 
is full of truths and errors. He as- 
sumes that these instruments are 
put forward by their advocates as 
"instruments of majority rule." This 
is wrong. They are instruments for 
obtaining the opportunity for the ma- 
jority to rule, but it is much more 
important that the intelligence of a 
community should rule than that a 
majority of its numbers should rule. 
A vote on a measure, assuming that 
the door of opportunity is open to 
all to vote on it who wish to do so, 
automatically weeds out the ignorant 
and the indifferent, who fail to vote on 
the measure, and secures a decision 
from those who are sufficiently in- 
telligent and interested to vote on 
the measure. This is government by 
intelligence, which is much better 
than "majority rule" — assuming al- 
ways that all who wish to vote on 
the measure have an opportunity to 
do so. 

The author complains that the 
Initiative "confides the leadership in 
legislation to small minorities." Has 
not this always been so, and is it 
not proper? Even when the door of 
opportunity is open to all, as it is 
in the exercise of the Initiative, it is 
natural, always has been and always 
will be natural, that a minority shall 
lead. Another great surprise is the 
statement, on the same page (306), 
that the Initiative fails "to work 
sufficiently in favor of the popular 
political education." It is well known 
that the direct opposite of this is 
true, and it is strange how Mr. Croly 
has fallen into such a gross error. 
However, among this and other er- 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



131 



rors some strong truths are given 
in favor of the I. and R. And he 
says distinctly, in spite of his erron- 
eous criticisms, that the Initiative 
"should be granted." 

Mr. Croly inclines toward the 
"strong executive" plan of govern- 
ment; but he does not hesitate to 
apply his keen scalpel to this, also. 
The thoughtful reader will be greatly 
helped by this amazingly critical 
book, if he will think for himself 
independently after he lays the book 
down. 



Newspaper Publicity Expensive 

An interesting bit of evidence bear- 
ing on the method of getting before 
the people any question to be submit- 
ted for their decision has come to 
our attention in the following para- 
graph from the Carlisle, Pa., Sentinel 
of Feb. 22: 

The newspapers of the state that 
published the constitutional amend- 
ments on the order of the Secretary of 
the Commonwealth ought to be paid 
at their regular rates. The trouble is, 
however, that the advertising was 
awarded for political effect and many 
of the newspapers getting it are of 
such circulation and size that their 
charges are nothing less than graft. 
For instance, a paper with less than 
200 (two hundred) circulation has* 
rendered a bill for nearly $400.00 — as 
much as is claimed by papers from 
4000 to 10,000 circulation. 

This shows one of the objections to 
the use of newspapers for giving 
publicity to measures to be voted 
on. The better and safer plan, as 
well as the less expensive, is for the 
state to print and distribute the text 
of the measures, with arguments pro 
and con to all the voters. Let the 
newspapers handle the news. 



A Disease and Its Remedy 

The Disease: 
"It passed the House, but was de- 
feated in the Senate." 



"It passed the Senate, but was de- 
feated in the House." 

These two sentences, which appear 
so frequently in the press dispatches 
from our state capitals, during . the 
sessions of our legislative bodies, ex- 
plain the defeat of more good legis- 
lation than all other causes combined. 

But when it comes to the crooked 
legislative deals backed by the polit- 
ical machine, this two-chambered ma- 
chinery is adjusted so as to offer few 
obstacles to speedy enactment. 

The Remedy: The single-chamber- 
ed legislature with small, well select- 
ed, well paid membership and with- 
out limit to length of sessions; its 
acts subject to the Referendum, and 
its members subject to the Recall, 
while the voters are armed with the 
Initiative to protect them from sins 
of omission by the legislature. 

But with the representative pro- 
cess of lawmaking thus improved, 
there would be rarely, if ever, need 
for the actual exercise of the Initia- 
tive, Referendum or Recall. 



Judge Lindsey Vindicated 

Just as this issue goes to press, we 
have the pleasure of reading dis- 
patches from Denver saying that Gov- 
ernor Carlson has vetoed the bills pass- 
ed by the Colorado legislature for the 
purpose of abolishing the Juvenile 
Court, over which Judge Ben Lindsey 
has presided for many years. We also 
had the pleasure of reading the news 
that the Grand Jury, called to consider 
charges against the moral character 
of Judge Lindsey, has completely ex- 
onerated him, and has indicted the 
attorney whom the Judge accused of 
having circulated libelous statements 
against him. The Grand Jury also 
censured Dr. Mary E. Bates and others 
for having circulated slanderous ar- 
ticles about the Judge and his Court. 
In a statement sent to the press, Judge 
Lindsey thanks his many friends for 
their support and declares that other 
people higher up who have been re- 
sponsible for the conspiracy against 
him will be prosecuted. We extend to 
Judge Lindsey, as our friend and as 
a Counselor of EQUITY, our hearty 
congratulations. 



132 



Status of the State-Wide Recall 

The adoption of amendments for 
the state-wide Recall by two more 
states, at last November's election, 
namely, by Kansas and Louis^na, 
as noted in the January Equity, 
suggests the need of a complete 



Equity 

summary on this subject for con- 
venient reference. The states which 
now have the Recall and the princi- 
pal facts about the amendment in 
each are therefore presented in the 
following table: 



STATES 


When 
Adopted 


Range of 
Application 


Petition 

Signers 

Required 


Plan of 

The 
Recall 


Use of 

The 
Recall 


Oregon 


1908 


All elected of- 
ficials, includ- 
ing judges 


25 per cent, 
state and local 


Assailed official 
on the ballot 


None 


California 


1911 


Same as Oregon 


12 per cent, 
state, 20 per 
cent, local 


Vote on Recall 
separate 


None 


Arizona* 


1912 


Same as Oregon 


25 per cent, 
state and lo- 
cal 


Same as Oregon 


None 


Arkansas 


1912 


Same as Oregon 


1 2 per cent, 
state, 25 per 
cent, local 


Same as 
California 


None 



Carried at the polls but barred by state supreme court on technicality 



Nevada 


1912 


Same as Oregon 


25 per cent, 
state and lo- 
cal 


Same as Oregon 


None 


Idaho 


1912 


All elective of- 
ficials except 
judges 


Details left to 
legislature, 
which never 
acted. Hence 
inoperative 






Colorado 


1912 


All elective of- 
ficials, includ- 
ing judges, 
also recall of 
decisions 


25 per cent, 
state and lo- 
cal 


Same as 
California 


None 


Washington 


1912 


All elective of- 
ficials except 
judges 


25 per cent, 
state and large 
cities, 35 per 
cent, local 


Same as Oregon 


None 


Kansas 


1914 


All elective 
and appoint- 
ive officials 


10 per cent, 
state, 15 per 
cent, county, 
25 per cent, 
district 


Same as 
California 


None 


Louisana 


1914 


All elective of- 
ficials except 
judges 


25 per cent, 
state and lo- 
cal 


Same as 
California 


None 



♦Advisory recall of U.S. senators and Federal judges and advisory nomination of Federal 
judges, enacted 1912. 



A Scientist's View of I. and R. 

Before the annual convention of 
the American Association for the Ad- 
vancement of Science, at Philadel- 
phia, December 29, the subject of dis- 
cussion was the war in Europe and 
its effects. Byron W. Holt of New 



York, advocated the Initiative and 
Referendum, as follows: 

"Keep the Intiative, Referendum and 
Recall in force at all times. Direct 
legislation not only safeguards the 
right and liberties of the people, but 
is invaluable for its educational fea- 
tures. It practically forces the voters 
to study public questions." 



133 



Proportional Representation Department 

Edited by C. G. Hoag 
OFFICERS OF THE LEAGUE 

President, William Dudley Foulke 
Vice-Presidents, Prof. John R. Commons 
William S. U'Ren 
Mrs. Louia F. Post 
Honorary Vice-Presidents, The Rt. Hon. Earl Grey, Ex-Governor General of Canada 

The Rt. Hon. Lord Courtney of Penwith, England 

John H. Humphreys, Secretary of the Proportional Representation Society, London 

Count Goblet d'Alviella, Vice-President of the Senate, Belgium 

Professor E. J. Nanson, University of Melbourne, Australia 



Charles Frederick 

Felix Adler New York 

Dr. J. F. Baldwin Ohio 

Charles A. Beard New York 

W. B. Boynton Ohio 

Harold S. Buttenheim. . . .New Jersey 

Richard S. Childs New York 

G. F. Chipman Manitoba 

Stoughton Cooley Illinois 

Alfred D. Cridge Oregon 

Horace E. Deming- New York 

Rev. Charles F. Dole. .Massachusetts 
George H. Duncan . . New Hampshire 

John E. Eastmond New York 

Charles W. Eliot Massachusetts 

John H. Finley New York 

John H. Gabriel Colorado 

Dr. Lucius F. C. Garvin. .Rhode Island 

William H. Gove Massachusetts 

Dr. John R. Haynes California 

Paxton Hibben Indiana 

William Hoag Massachusetts 

Harold J. Howland New York 

Jeremiah W. Jenks New York 



Council 
Adams.. New York Judge Ben. E. Lindsey Colorado 



Charles McCarthy Wisconsin 

Robert D. Owen Oklahoma 

Robert Treat Paine . . Massachusetts 

Eltweed Pomeroy Texas 

Jackson H. Ralston, Washington, D. C. 

Daniel S. Remsen New York 

Linton Satterthwaite .... New Jersey 
J. Henry Scattergood . . Pennsylvania 

J. S. Schapiro New York 

Henry R. Seager New York 

Isaac Sharpless Pennsylvania 

Albert Shaw New York 

Lieut. C. P. Shaw Virginia 

Charles P. Steinmetz New York 

Moorfield Storey Massachusetts 

Dr. C. F. Taylor Pennsylvania 

Carl D. Thompson Illinois 

Robert Tyson Ontario 

DeLancey Verplanck New York 

John M. Vincent Maryland 

Thomas Raeburn White. Pennsylvania 
Dr. N. Wolverton . . British Columbia 

P. P. Woodward Alberta 

Charles Zeublin Massachusetts 



General Secretary-Treasurer, C. G. Hoag, Haverford, Pa. 

(June 15th till October 1st, Tamworth, N. H.) 

Secretary-Treasurer for Canada, Howard S. Ross, K. C, 326 Transportation Bldg., Montreal 



Charles Francis Adams 

,We are sorry to have to record the 
death in Washington on March 19th 
of Charles Francis Adams, long a 
member and councillor of this 
League. 

It is unnecessary for Equity to 
give an account of Mr. Adam's not- 
able career. He was distinguished as 
a soldier, as an administrator, and 
as a man of letters. For the readers 
of this department, however, the 
point of special interest in respect to 
Mr. Adams is that a man of his in- 
fluence, his strength of mind, and his 
character saw clearly the unreason- 



ableness of the present system of 
electing representative bodies and 
could always be counted on to sup- 
port the reasonable system advocated 
by the P. R. League. 

In his letter to Chairman Rucker 
of the House Committee in support 
of the Bailey Bill, Mr. Adams wrote: 
"This matter is one in which I feel 
great interest; but I fear I shall be 
unable to appear in behalf of the 
measure. None the less, I feel very 
deep interest in promoting it. The 
reason of my interest is easily stated. 
At present I am practically disfran- 
chised." 



134 



Equity 



P. R. ACTIVITIES IN ONTARIO 

By Daniel G. Whittle 

Secretary of the People's Forum, Ottawa. 

Proportional Representation has 
been a much discussed topic in Otta- 
wa during the past few weeks. The 
People's Forum, a Sunday evening 
lecture society with an average audi- 
ence of 1100 people, offered their 
platform to Mr. C. G. Hoag, General 
Secretary of the American Propor- 
tional Representation League, and 
the supporters of the movement in 
Ottawa took full advantage of the 
opportunity afforded them of making 
Mr. Hoag's visit productive of the 
best possible results. 

Two weeks before the address a 
small committee was formed and a 
plan of campaign drawn up. A Model 
Ballot was decided upon, if the co- 
operation of the newspapers could 
be secured. The various proprietors 
were interviewed, and the "Citizen," 
"Le Droit," and "Le Temps" very 
kindly consented to give publicity to 
the scheme by printing a model ballot 
consisting of fourteen candidates. 
Seven of these were to be elected as 
a proposed commission for the gov- 
ernment of the city of Ottawa. In 
choosing candidates for the ballot 
care was taken to include a represent- 
ative of each group or division of 
people in the city. Ottawa has a 
numerous French-Canadian popula- 
tion, a more numerous English 
speaking population, and a fair num- 
ber of European foreigners, as well 
as a moderate number of Jews. Can- 
didates were chosen from each rel- 
atively large section, including the 
business element and men who al- 
ready occupy seats in the city coun- 
cil and are prominent in the civic 
and political affairs of the city. 

Through the kindly interest of the 
Mayor of Ottawa, the corporation 



ballot boxes were obtained and dis- 
tributed throughout the city. Two 
of the largest business houses, hav- 
ing branches in every district, at once 
gave permission, when requested, for 
a ballot box to be left at each of their 
stores. On Saturday, Feb. 27th, each 
of the three newspapers named print- 
ed the model ballot. It was fully 
explained that the purpose was to 
help to illustrate a lecture on Pro- 
portional Representation to be given 
on March 7th by Mr. C. G. Hoag at 
the People's Forum. Readers were 
asked to mark the ballot, cut it out, 
and drop it in one of the ballot boxes 
to be found in the stores. On the 
Tuesday following the boxes were 
collected, and with the kind permis- 
sion of Mayor Porter a public count 
was made in the council chamber of 
the city hall, under the supervision 
of a committee of well-known citi- 
zens. Mr. H. S. Ross came up from 
Montreal to take part in this proceed- 
ing and to further the cause in Ot- 
tawa by explaining the advantages 
of the proportional method of elect- 
ing representatives. Justice Iding- 
ton of the Supreme Court acted as 
honorary recording officer. 

On counting the ballots it was found 
that no fewer than 1,314 people had 
voted. This comparatively large 
total was due, in a great measure, 
to the additional publicity given to 
Proportional Representation by the 
Citizen, one of the most influential 
non-partisan newspapers in Eastern 
Canada. During the week preceding 
the public count of the votes this 
paper published a number of editor- 
ials commenting favorably on pro- 
portional representation and giving 
instances of Canadian election results 
showing the need of the reform. 

It was interesting to note that the 
final result of the count was an excel- 
lent justification of the Hare method 



Proportional Representation Department 



135 



of electing candidates. Each consid- 
erable body of opinion secured a rep- 
resentative. The French section ob- 
tained two representatives out of the 
seven to be elected; the Jewish com- 
munity secured one; the labor inter- 
est, one; and the other three were 
business men who are members of 
the present city council. 

Naturally, proportional representa- 
tion became a much talked of topic. 
Interest in the movement was arous- 
ed and favorable opinion was in some 
cases publicly expressed. The Allied 
Trades and Labor Council at their 
weekly meeting went on record as 
advising all trade union members to 
hear Mr. Hoag's address on Propor- 
tional Representation before the Peo- 
ple's Forum. Many members of the 
city council attended the lecture; and 
a number of members of Parliament, 
including one or two Cabinet minis- 
ters, were also present. To an audi- 
ence of about 1,200 people Mr. Hoag 
gave a clear exposition of the demo- 
cratic principles; of the system of 
proportional representation, using 
the model ballot to illustrate it. 

The use of the model ballot in a 
lecture on proportional representa- 
tion would seem to be of inestimable 
benefit. It is clear that people can 
more easily grasp the general prin- 
ciples of such a reform, and more 
readily appreciate the equity of the 
system, when it is demonstrated to 
them by means of an actual election 
in which they have taken part. Al- 
ready some results of this direct 
method of propaganda may be noted. 
In addition to the endorsement of the 
Trades and Labor Council mentioned 
above, the movement has received 
support from other quarters. At the 
general meeting of the Ottawa Con- 
servative Club, held on March 12th, 
five days after Mr. Hoag's address, 
Mr. N. Champagne, a controller of 



the city who is a very prominent man 
in civic affairs, introduced a motion 
advocating the preferential ballot in 
selecting members as candidates for 
the Provincial and Dominion elec- 
tions. He stated that under the pres- 
ent regulation a candidate who got 
the lowest number of votes dropped 
out, leaving the contest to be decided 
by other ballots. Therefore, he ad- 
vocated the use of a ballot whereon 
members could mark their first and 
second choice. After several opinions 
were expressed it was agreed to al- 
low the executive to deal with the 
matter and report back to the annual 
meeting when a final decision will be 
reached. Again, in an address at the 
Forum on Sunday, March 14th, the 
week following Mr. Hoag's visit, 
Controller Harold Fisher, another of 
Ottawa's civic officials, speaking on 
the subject of Municipal Government, 
stated that proportional representa- 
tion was one of the reforms much 
needed in civic affairs, and its adop- 
tion would mean a great advance on 
the present method of electing a rep- 
resentative body. 

Hearing Before a Parliament Committee 
In addition to these activities in 
civic circles, the adherents of P. R. 
in Ottawa paid particular attention 
to the wider sphere of national in- 
fluence. It was realized that if a 
hearing could be obtained for Mr. 
Hoag before a body of Canada's 
legislators in the Dominion Parlia- 
ment, it might be an excellent means 
of explaining to the people of Can- 
ada, through their representatives!, 
the great benefits which would accrue 
from the adoption of proportional 
representation. The present major- 
ity system is admitted to be unfair. 
A Special Committee on Electoral 
Reform was appointed some time ago 
'to inquire into the operation of the 
Act regulating the election of mem- 



136 



Equity 



bers to the House of Commons. Cor- 
respondence was entered into with 
this committee asking that Mr. C. G. 
Hoag, General Secretary of the 
American Proportional Representa- 
tion League, be granted the honor of 
appearing before them to explain the 
principles of P. R. and to testify -to 
the support given to the movement 
by eminent statesmen of all shades 
of opinion in various countries. The 
chairman of the Committee, Hon. C. 
J. Doherty, Minister of Justice, in- 
terested himself in the matter, con- 
sulted his colleagues, and arrange- 
ments were made to give Mr. Hoag 
a hearing on Wednesday, March 10th, 
in the Railway Committee room of 
the House of Commons. On Tuesday 
announcement was made from the 
floor of the House inviting members 
to be present at the hearing. 

The hearing occupied more than 
an hour. Mr. Hoag referred to the 
general elections of 1896, when the 
total Liberal vote of the Dominion 
was 405,000, and the Conservative 
vote 416,000, or 111,000 more than the 
Liberal vote. Yet the Liberals were 
returned to power with a majority of 
thirty members! In the general 
election in 1904 Nova Scotia elected 
eighteen members. The vote was di- 
vided thus: Conservatives, 46,000; 
Liberals, 56,000. Proportionately the 
former party was entitled to eight of 
Nova Scotia's members and the lat- 
ter party to ten. As a matter of 
fact, the Liberals won the whole eight- 
een seats. These paradoxical results 
were due to the present unfair sys- 
tem of electing representatives. It 
was pointed out that men of light 
and leading in all parties in Great 
Britain, as well as in other countries, 
had endorsed P. R. Earl Grey, late 
Governor-General of Canada, was 
President of the English P. R. Soci- 
ety and an Honorary Vice-President 



of the American League. Mr. Bal- 
four and Prime Minister Asquith had 
both commented on the necessity of 
reforming our present system of 
electing members of parliament. "It 
was infinitely to the advantage of the 
House of Commons," Mr. Asquith had 
said, "if it was to be a real reflection 
and mirror of the national mind, that 
there should be no strain of opinion 
honestly entertained by any sub- 
stantial body of the King's subjects 
which should not there find repre- 
sentation and speech." Such a result 
could be obtained only through the 
adoption of the proportional system. 

Mr. Hoag fully explained how the 
new system worked out, both in the 
Hare and the List methods. The 
Commons and Senate members who 
heard him were evidently impressed. 
Hon. C. J. Doherty, in thanking Mr. 
Hoag for his address, stated that 
they all felt that what he had said 
demonstrated the importance of the 
question and the necessity of giving 
thought and consideration to it. 

In the meantime the proportional- 
ists of Ottawa had entered into com- 
munication with the Prime Minister 
of Ontario, Hon. W. H. Hearst, and 
the leader of the Opposition, Hon. N. 
W. Rowell. A hearing was solicited 
for Mr. Hoag before the members of 
the Ontario Legislature at Toronto. 
This effort also was successful. Both 
the Prime Minister and the leader 
of the Opposition kindly agreed to 
arrange that a hearing be given to 
Mr. Hoag, and an announcement was 
made from the floor of the Ontario 
House, inviting members of the Pro- 
vincial Legislature to be present on 
Thursday, March 11, to hear Mr. Hoag 
speak on proportional representa- 
tion. With this address in Toronto 
before members of the Provincial 
House Mr. Hoag concluded a strenu- 
ous series of valuable addresses 



Proportional Representation Department 



137 



which are sure to be of great benefit 
to the future political and therefore 
social progress of this country. Their 
educative effect is certain to be seen 
in future developments. Mr. Hoag's 
evidence before the Committee was 
taken down by an official stenog- 
rapher, and will be embodied in the 
report on Electoral Reform, thus 
placing proportional representation 
on official record in Canada. 

As might be expected, the recent 
publicity has awakened much inter- 
est in electoral reform. The immed- 
iate task before the supporters of 
the movement in Ottawa lies in con- 
solidating this interest in favor of 
proportional representation. The co- 
operation in this work of many of 
the best representative men in the 
city has already been secured. 



Visit of the General Secretary of the 
League to Canada 

Besides the three addresses men- 
tioned in the article in this depart- 
ment by Mr. Whittle of Ottawa, I 
delivered two in Montreal, one before 
the Reform Club and the other before 
the Equal Suffrage League. These 
addresses were arranged through the 
kindness of our Canadian Secretary, 
H. S. Ross, K. C, of Montreal. 

My visit to Montreal gave me the 
opportunity of meeting Mr. Ross per- 
sonally for the first time. This was 
a pleasure that I appreciated very 
much. I can assure the members of 
the League that they are very for- 
tunate in having Mr. Ross as their 
Canadian secretary. 

In Ottawa I was much impressed 
by the thorough-going way in which 
the group of proportionalists there 
had prepared for my visit to the 
city. The straw vote taken through 
the co-operation of the newspapers 
and large stores had been carried out 
admirably and had made P. R. a 



subject of discussion throughout the 
city. When I met the leaders of this 
group personally, I realized that the 
group is one of the strongest to be 
found in any city in the United States 
or Canada. Indeed, I do not know of 
any other city in which so much has 
been done for our cause in two or 
three weeks as was done the first two 
weeks of March in Ottawa. 

C. G. Hoag 



The Bailey Bill 

On February 16th the Committee 
of the House on the Election of the 
President, Vice-President, and Rep- 
resentatives in Congress granted a 
hearing on the Bailey Bill described 
in our January issue. The purpose 
of the bill, it will be remembered, is 
to permit states electing three or 
more members of the House to elect 
them by the proportional method. 

The hearing was attended by a 
number of proportionalists, includ- 
ing Representative Bailey, Mrs. Alice 
Thacher Post, Jackson H. Ralston, 
Lieut. C. P. Shaw, and the General 
Secretary of the P. R. League. Ad- 
dresses were made by Mr. Bailey, 
the secretary of the League, Mrs. 
Post, and Mr. Ralston. The publish- 
ed report of the hearing contains al- 
so statements in support of the bill 
by Lieut. Shaw, Governor Walsh of 
Massachusetts, George Foster Pea- 
body (Treasurer of the Democratic 
National Committee), George Burn- 
ham, Jr., Charles Francis Adams, 
Erving Wins-low, Rev. Charles F. 
Dole (President of the ^Twentieth 
Century Club of Boston), George H. 
Duncan ( Secretary of the New Hamp- 
shire Direct Legislation League), 
Daniel Kiefer, Western Starr, and 
others. Part of one of these state- 
ments, that of R. W. Kelsey, Profes- 
sor of History and Political Science 
at Haverford College, may be quoted 



138 



Equity 



here. "I consider this," wrote Prof. 
Kelsey, "the next step toward real 
democracy in the United States." 

As the League is to be allowed to 
purchase some copies of this report, 
a copy will be sent to every member 
of the League. It should be read by 
all who receive it. The address of 
Mr. Bailey, in particular, is an admir- 
able contribution to the literature of 
the cause. 

The publicity given to the Bailey 
Bill by the leading newspaper cor- 
respondents of Washington was very 
gratifying. Scores of newspapers 
throughout the country printed ar- 
ticles on the purpose of the bill and 
the anomalous results of the present 
system of election. 



P. R. for Cities 

Los Angeles, Another P. R. move- 
ment seems to be taking shape in 
Los Angeles. Some of the interests 
that did not favor the proposed P. 
R. amendment to the city's charter 
that was put forward last autumn 
are now looking into the question 
seriously on its merits. 

St. Louis. The bill mentioned in 
our January issue, which would have 
provided P. R. for the election of the 
St. Louis Council, has not passed. A 
bill granting the city a larger meas- 
ure of self-government, however, has 
very recently become law. In con- 
nection with the city's present char- 
acter, this bill opens the way for the 
possible adoption, under the pro- 
visions of the Initiative, of the pro- 
portional system for the election of 
the city's council. The present char- 
ter of the city provides that "when- 
ever it may be done in harmony with 
the state's constitution and laws," 
"non-partisan nominations, perferen- 
tial voting, or proportional represen- 
tation" may be provided by ordin- 
ance. 



Springfield, Mass. On February 5th 
the Springfield Citizens' Charter Com- 
mission of One Hundred was address- 
ed by C. G. Hoag, on proportional 
representation. In connection with 
the address 'William Hoag, Esq., of 
Boston, a former member of the 
Massachusetts Legislature, conducted 
straw election on the Hare plan. 

This was the fourth of the public 
addresses in charter-making arrang- 
ed by the Springfield Commission. It 
is an interesting fact that all three 
of the previous speakers are also ad- 
vocates of the proportional system 
for the election of a city council. 
Those speakers were Hon. Henry T. 
Hunt, ex-Mayor of Cincinnati, Henry 
Bruere, City Chamberlain of New 
York, and Henry M. Waite, City 
Manager of Dayton. 

Ashtabula. The champions of pro- 
portional representation in Ashta- 
bula have decided not to put the city 
to the expense of a special election 
on the proposed amendment prescrib- 
ing a proportional system for the 
election of the council. They are 
therefore deferring the filing of their 
petition so that the election on the 
proposed amendment will be held at 
the time of the regular election next 
autumn. 

The provisions of the proposed P. 
R. amendment of the Ashtabula 
charter have been very favorably 
commented on by the secretaries of 
the P. R. Society of London, who, 
indeed, have sent out copies of the 
amendment to proportionalists in 
New Zealand with a view to the pos- 
sible adoption of similar provisions 
there. 

In connection with this note see 
the excerpts from Professor Hatton's 
recent address at Ashtabula, in this 
issue. 

Medford, Oregon. The proposed 
new charter for Medford, which was 



Proportional Representation Department 



139 



drawn up on the City Manager Plan 
and provided the proportional system 
for the election of the council, was 
unfortunately defeated when submit- 
ted to the voters in January. Mr. 
Benjamin C. Sheldon of Medford, 
who drafted this charter, deserves 
the highest credit for the good fight 
he made. He expects to continue his 
campaign of education and to win 
out in the end. 



Professor Hatton on P. R. 

The Ashtabula Star's report of ex- 
cerpts from an address before the 
Chamber of Commerce of Ashtabula, 
Ohio, by Augustus R. Hatton, Ph. D., 
Professor of Political Science at 
Western Reserve University, and 
member of the recent Charter Com- 
mission of Cleveland. 
Editor's Note: Last November Ash- 
tabula adopted a new charter on the 
City Manager Plan, with a council of 
Seven to be elected at large by the 
old-fashioned method. The question 
now at issue is whether the city shall 
adopt an amendment to the new char- 
ter providing- for the election of the 
Council by the Hare system of pro- 
portional represenation. 

"I congratulate the Charter Com- 
mission of Ashtabula that in drawing 
the charter they provide for the busi- 
ness-manager plan, for that plan is 
coming to be the most popular by far 
of all the new forms of municipal 
government. It has developed with 
rapid strides; in short, it seems to be 
the necessary step if we are to obtain 
the highest degree of efficiency from 
our city governments." 



the greatest aim of the new form of 
government is that at last you will 
be able to separate politics from the 
purely administrative affairs of your 
city. 

A Place for Politics 

"There is a place for politics, but 
it is not in the administrative affairs 
of a city. You can never get rid of 
politics entirely, nor do you want to, 
because politics is a difference of 
opinions, and so far as the council 
of your city is concerned you want 
opinions and you want to elect men 
to that body because of their policies 
and opinions. However, when once 
the policy is determined, there is no 
reason why the action of the execu- 
tive who administers the policy 
should be colored with personal 
politics. 

Where P. R. Comes In 

"Now the adoption of the city-man- 
ager plan does not mean that you will 
keep out of politics; it means that 
you will have a good chance to keep 
out of politics, and it is here where 
the proportional representation amend- 
ment comes in. 

"In the first place, any body or or- 
ganization which legislates for a peo- 
ple should be governed by two prin- 
ciples. First, it ought to reflect the 
will of the majority of the people of 
the community; in other words, the 
majority should rule. Second, it 
ought to be representative of the 
community; in other words, it should 
represent the large groups of opin- 
ion in the community." 



"The chief step you have made in 
Ashtabula toward better government 
may not have occurred to some of 
you. The city-manager idea in itself 
may appeal to many of you as a 
panacea for all the ills with which 
you are now afflicted, but in the end 



"Under the plan at present pro- 
vided in your charter the council will 
be elected at large, and one-factional 
rule will be possible because a group 
in a city which can carry one candi- 
date can carry them all. Thus, one 
group can, and often will, rule a city. 



140 



Equity 



"The amendment as proposed would 
remedy this defect in your present 
charter. In reading it over I am 
greatly impressed with its ingenuity 
and completeness. The only thing 
against it,, is that people do not 
understand it, and that is no reason 
at all. 

"To be very brief, the proportional 
representation plan is a scheme 
whereby majority rule will be given, 
but at the same time the minority 
will have some representation. The 
plan works out something like this: 

"Instead of dividing the city into 
wards and electing one man from 
each ward, which admits of much 
evil, it is possible to have the council 
so constructed that the constituency 
is not made up from geographical 
lines, but by the number of people 
composing that constituency. The 
constituency is divided off by opin- 
ions rather than geographical lines. 
You have a representative council 
and a majority council at the same 
time." 

* * * * 

"I will venture to say that if you 
men take a copy of this amendment 
home with you, and read it through, 
you will be in favor of it. It is not 
difficult to understand. Neither is it 
a socialistic or solely a laboring 
man's doctrine; it is a doctrine of 
broad and highly intelligent men and 
is one which will particularly appeal 
to men of the business type. In 
theory it is right, in practice it is 
right To my mind, it is the fair- 
est method of election known." 



Uruguay 

The following information has been 
kindly furnished to the League by 
Mr. Nicolay A. Grevstad, the Amer- 
ican Minister accredited to that 
country. 



"In the Republic of Uruguay the 
principle of proportional representa- 
tion is not recognized by the Consti- 
tution of the country, which dates 
back to 1830. It is the prevailing 
opinion in all parties that the organic 
law needs revision in several impor- 
tant particulars. While they differ 
sharply as to the scope and specific 
character of the constitutional reform 
which is desired by all, there is gen- 
eral agreement that the principle of 
proportional representation must be 
incorporated in the revised constitu- 
tion. 

"At present minority representation 
obtains at the elections of members of 
the National House of Representatives 
and the members of the department 
legislative bodies (juntas). Under the 
rule established by the election law 
by virtue of the general authority 
conferred upon Congress by the Con- 
stitution, the minority party, or the 
stronger or strongest minority party 
of a district, is entitled to representa- 
tion corresponding in a general way 
to its strength, provided it casts at 
least 25 per cent of the total vote of 
the district. 

"The Colorado party has adopted a 
similar rule for the election of its 
national committee or governing 
board." 



New Zealand 

A letter from Mr. George Fowlds 
of New Zealand, dated February 1st, 
to Mr. Daniel Kiefer of Cincinnati, 
explains the P. R. situation there. 

"I have the satisfaction of seeing 
my program of proportional repre- 
sentation and increased land value 
taxation embodied in the official Pro- 
gram of the Liberal Party and in the 
Program of both sections of the La- 
bour Party. 

"I think it is probable that the 
Liberal Party may come into office 
with a small majority, including the 
Labour members (six), and if so pro- 
portional representation is sure to 
pass." 



The Short Ballot Department 



141 



NOTES 

The Progressive League of Phila- 
delphia is to elect members of its 
council this spring by the proportion- 
al system. 



The syndicated "National Editor- 
ial" printed by many of the leading 
newspapers of the country on March 
19th was on the question, "Have We 
Representative Government?" The 
author was Lieut. C. P. Shaw, a 
member of the Council of the P. R. 
League, and the editorial was a clear 
argument in favor of proportional 
representation. 



Prof. L. Dupriez of the University 
of Louvain, Belgium, is now deliver- 



ing a special course of lectures at 
Harvard University. His subject is 
Proportional Representation in Belgium, 
iWe hope to publish translations of 
parts of his lecture, in our next issue. 



On March 29th Senator Dandurand 
of Montreal advocated in the Cana- 
dian Senate, a body whose members 
are now appointed for life, the elec- 
tion of the members, after a period 
of years, by proportional representa- 
tion. 



The American P. R. League wel- 
comes new members. The annual 
dues are one dollar. Address th0 
League at Haverford, Pa. 



THE SHORT BALLOT DEPARTMENT. 

Edited by H. S. Gilbertson, executive secretary of The National Short Ballot Organization, 
383 Fourth Avenue, New York City. 
Officers of the Short Ballot Organization: President, Woodrow Wilson. Vice-Presidents, 
Winston Churchill; Horace E. Deming; Ben B. Lindsey; William S. U'Ren; William Allen White; 
Clinton Rogers Woodruff; John Mitchell, Mt. Vernon, N. Y. Advisory Board, Lawrence F. Abbott, 
Richard S. Childs, Henry Jones Ford. Norman Hapgood, Woodrow Wilson. Secretary and Treas- 
urer, Richard S. Childs. Executive Secretary, H. S. Gilbertson. 



The movement for the Short Ballot 
in New York is taking on the char- 
acter of a fight. The convention ap- 
pears to be in control of the more 
progressive wing of the Republican 
party, Mr. Root's influence predom- 
inating. Senator Root is a powerful 
friend of the Short Ballot idea and he 
puts it first among the subjects to 
be worked out by the convention. He 
is ably seconded by Henry L. Stim- 
son, John Lord O'Brian, Frederick C. 
Tanner (Republican State Chair- 
man), Jacob Gould Schurman and 
other well known public leaders. The 
opposition will be led by Edgar Tru- 
man Brackett, an old Republican 
leader of reactionary fame, who has 
already started out to warn the peo- 
ple of New York against ''giving the 
Governor too much power." 



The New York Short Ballot Organ- 
ization will press in the constitution- 
al convention its proposals for ap- 
pointment by the Governor of the 
other state officers who are now elec- 
tive and will also ask for an amend- 
ment to the provision of the consti- 
tution which fixes the elective status 
of the principal county officers 
throughout the state, including the 
district attorney, sheriff, county clerk, 
and register of deeds. It is the hope 
of this organization that this restric- 
tion will be removed so that it will 
be possible in the future for the 
legislature to grant to the counties 
a measure of home rule permitting 
them to determine for themselves, 
within certain limits, what shall be 
the form of their county government. 

The appointive judiciary has not 



142 



Equity 



been a part of our program. We 
have felt that public sentiment did 
not favor such a change at the pres- 
ent time and have worked out, ac- 
cordingly, a method which we believe 
would preserve the popular control 
over the judiciary by means of elec- 
tion, but would also give the people 
some of the advantages of the ap- 
pointive system. Our suggestion 
was that the Governor be given pow- 
er to make nominations in addition 
to those made by petition, it being 
presumed that the ballot would be 
made non-partisan. 

Rather unexpectedly there has de- 
veloped in New York State, particu- 
larly in the greater city, a powerful 
sentiment among the legal profession 
for the appointive judiciary. The 
Association of the Bar of New York 
City and the New York County 
Lawyers' Association have gone on 
record in favor of the plan. On 
March 26th as a result of a powerful 
arraignment of the present supreme 
court judges by ex-Judge D-Cady 
Herrick, the State Bar Association 
passed a resolution favoring the elec- 
tion of the Court of Appeals but 
giving to this court the power to ap- 
point the supreme court judges. It 
is not expected that the sentiment in 
New York is sufficiently strong for 
an appointive judiciary to warrant 
an embodiment of the Bar Associa- 
tion's proposal in the body of the 
constitution. The most that can be 
expected will be the submission of 
the proposition separately. 

A measure providing for the ap- 
pointment by the Governor of all 
state administrative officers now elec- 
tive has recently passed the Senate 
of Colorado. 

In Massachusetts, State Treasurer 
Charles L. Burrill is responsible for 
inaugurating movements for the 
state Short Ballot along the conven- 



tional lines. Mr. Burrill had such a 
measure introduced in the legislature 
this year and it was supported by 
some of the most prominent leaders 
of the Republican, Democratic and 
Progressive parties, including Rob- 
ert A. Luce, Governor Walsh and 
Joseph A. Walker. Behind this move- 
ment, however, was no organization 
of any kind and many of the Mass- 
achusetts newspapers, doubtless for 
lack of appreciation of what the 
measure really meant, opposed it. 
For a spontaneous movement, the ef- 
fort made in Massachusetts this 
year was not at all bad. 

Commission Government Advances 

Within recent weeks commission 
government has made great strides 
in the State of New Jersey in the 
adoption of the plan by Hoboken, 
Bayonne and New Brunswick. Other 
cities in other states which have 
adopted the system are Lincoln and 
Coal City, 111., Jackson, Tenn., and 
Asheville, N. C. 

The interest shown in the commis- 
sion-manager plan is evidenced by 
the introduction of bills providing for 
this system in Iowa, Missouri and 
Indiana. 

The Iowa bill, which applies only 
to cities now under the commission 
form of government, was introduced 
by Representative Arch McFarlane 
and has already passed the lower 
house by a vote of 96 to 6. 

The Indiana measure would have 
provided an option for Indiana cities 
between the commission-manager form 
and the regular commission plan. 

Cities which have adopted the com- 
mission-manager plan recently |are 
Sherman, Texas, and Bakersfield, Cal. 
Both of these charters were adopted 
under home-rule authority and both 
contain interesting variations from 
the typical city-manager form. The 



The Short Ballot Department 



143 



Sherman charter provides for a coun- 
cil of fifteen members elected under 
a system of partial renewal. While 
this will make a rather long list of 
names, it is probable that in a city 
the size of Sherman (population 
about 12,000) the electors are suffi- 
ciently acquainted with the candi- 
dates. In view of the rather large 
council a wise provision is made for 
an executive committee or commis- 
sion to be chosen by the members of 
•the council from among their own 
number — subject to recall in a simi- 
lar manner at any time. The mayor 
is also a member of this commission. 
This body appoints the city manager 
and exercises the usual powers of a 
governing body. It must be pointed 
out that such a plan, in spite of ap- 
pearances, is not a bi-cameral sys- 
tem, since the ultimate responsibility 
rests with the elective council and 
mayor. The charter provides by law 
exactly what always happens in a 
large representative body. There is 
always an inner group which formu- 
lates and steers action. 

The Bakersfield charter is interest- 
ing because it retains the ward sys- 
tem, making provision however for 
non-partisan elections. The Bakers- 
field experiment at least illustrates 
the flexibility of the commission- 
manager plan, under which the mem- 
bers of the council are not required 
to exercise administrative functions 
and may therefore be chosen by the 
people in the manner which suits 
local conditions best. 

Commission-manager charters were 
defeated during March in Ypsilanti, 
Mich., Visalia, Cal., and Durham, N. 
C. The majority in each case was 
rather small. The new system was 
voted upon in Charlotte and Wil- 
mington, N. C, late in March. New- 
burgh, N. Y., will vote on April 30th, 
Tyler, Tex., and Brainerd, Minn., on 



April 6th. Among the cities which 
are interested in the system are Dun- 
kirk, Binghamton and Lackawanna, 
N. Y., and Durango, Colo. Several 
members of the charter commission 
at Newark, N. J., are flirting with 
the idea, but it hardly seems likely 
that their interest will eventuate in 
anything definite. The Schenectady 
Board of Trade started out some 
months ago to investigate commis- 
sion government. In the latter part 
of February they issued a report 
commending the system but express- 
ing a belief that the commission- 
manager plan had shown better re- 
sults and was better suited to 
Schenectady. 

Students of this plan will be in- 
terested in reading the first annual 
report of the Dayton commission. It 
abounds in refreshing evidences of 
the devotion of the new city govern- 
ment to the interests of the whole 
people. With an increase in the bud- 
get of $49,000, the commission was 
able to furnish the city with new 
services aggregating in value to 
$139,000. 

Better County Government 

A new contribution to the scanty 
literature on county government is 
the Proceedings of the Conference 
for Better County Government held 
at Schenectady last November. This 
contains a number of able papers on 
county finance, charities, adminis- 
tration, tax-administration courts 
and the general plan of county gov- 
ernment. A copy will be sent on re- 
quest to anyone interested in county 
government by the editor of this de- 
partment. 



The long ballot of candidates is 
complicated and confusing. The short 
ballot is simple, clear, and makes for 
greater intelligence in the choice of 
candidates. 



2% Watlb-Mttym 

of Iff* 

Satert Urflttmtttg fteitl*m*ttt 

Slaltoortf), Honbon, & €. 



/"^ OD make the World one State! 
All nations, small and great, 

One civic whole! 
Self-ruled each people be! 
All peoples linked and free! 
Glorious in unity 

From pole to pole! 



One World, one destiny: 
One Race, one family: 

One God above! 
All States upheld in one, 
All laws excelled in one, 
All lives impelled by One,- 

One Life, One Love. 



Equity 

[Formerly Equity Series] 

Devoted to improved processes of self government, including the 
Initiative and Referendum, the Recall, Proportional Representation, 
the Short Ballot, the Preferential Ballot, the One-chambered Legislative 
Body and whatever methods tend to increase the efficiency and democratic 
control of municipal, state, national and international government. 

is cents Ser c y onv Quarterly Philadelphia, July 1915 



Contents 

EDITORIAL: Page 

Standardizing State Constitutions 147 

A Proposed Constitution for the State of New York ,.^_ 151 

Another Proposed Constitution <\ . • ^*/£54 

T/inht nisi V/r»//> i '/-*** c//f t*i i/t /iif c *! CO 



Light on State Constitutions . . . 

Shall a Bill of Rights be Included in a Modern State Constitution . . 

Our Blundering Lawmakers •./ \i">l< 



% 



The High Cost of Legislatures »*>.[. .^X t*». v^6 

Why Smaller Legislatures? f~?. \ .-£>. Qi '1*63' 

The Story of One Legislature ^V'f?. . . 163 

A Typical Legislature \4?. X^. . . 164 

Constitutional Growth ></^v. • • 167 

Dangerous National Neighbors ?:..... 172 

THE INITIATIVE, REFERENDUM AND RECALL DEPARTMENT: 

Taking Part in the Game 1 74 

Mr. Barnes an Anarchist 175 

Deliberate Legislation Desired 176 

A Critic of Equity Answered 177 

As To Abuse of the Referendum 177 

lt Amended to Destruction'' 1 180 

Amendment of Initiated Bills 181 

Senator Lodge Answered 182 

THE MARCH OF POPULAR GOVE RNENT IN THE VARIOUS STATES 185 

California 185 Nebraska 187 Pennsylvania 189 

Illinois 185 New Jersey 187 South Dakota 190 

Massachusetts 186 New York 187 Virginia 191 

Michigan 186 North Dakota 188 Washington 192 

Minnesota 186 

How to Locate Responsibility 193 

Limitation of the I. and R 196 

The l 'Big Thing 11 in California 196 

Chamber of Commerce Referendum 207 

PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION DEPARTMENT: 

C. G. Hoag, Editor 

P. R. Under The New Danish Constitution 197 

The New York Constitutional Convention and P. R 199 

The Dupriez Dinner 200 

Direct Primaries from a Proportionalist 1 s Point of View 200 

Notes 203 

THE SHORT BALLOT DEPARTMENT: 141 

H. S. Gilbertson, Editor 

The Short Ballot 204 

County Government 206 

The City-Manager Plan 207 



Equity 

[Formerly Equity Series] 

Including the Direct Legislation Record, the Referendum News and the 
Proportional Representation Review. 

The purpose of this publication is to improve the machinery for self -government, to pro- 
mote honest and efficient government, and to place public affairs and public officials 
under direct final control of the electorate. The ideal is: That every American commun- 
ity — town, city and county — shall have the freest and simplest plan of self-government 
possible, resulting in the most efficient government possible: That every state shall have 
a short and simple constitution, fewer and better laws, and a more efficient government: 
That the National constitution shall be more easy to amend than at present, and that it 
shall be possible for the people of the Nation to express themselves definitely concerning 
National issues whenever they may wish to do so: That the civilized governments of the 
world shall cooperate through a central organization to conserve life and property, re- 
placing the wanton destruction of war. 

Charles Fremont Taylor, Editor and Publisher 
Edwin S. Potter, Associate Editor 

1520 Chestnut St., Philadelphia, Pa. 



EDITORIAL COUNSELORS 

J. W. Sullivan, New York City George E. Chamberlain 

Founder of the Direct Legislation Record U. S. Senator from Oregon 

Eltweed Pomeroy, Donna, Texas J. H. Ralston, Washington, D. C. 

Former Editor of the Direct Legislation Record Delos f . Wilcox, New York 

Geo. H. Shibley, Washington, D. C. T ^ n ^ A „, rTM 

Founder of the Referendum News L - F - c - Garvin 

W. S. U'Ren, Oregon, „ XT Ex-Governor of Rhode Island 

Father of the "Oregon System" George Norris 

Senator Rob't. L. Owen -_ U. S. Senator from Nebraska 

President of the National Popular Govern- MlLES Poindexter 

ment League u# s * Se nator * rom Washington 

Dr. Wm. Preston Hill, St. Louis, Mo. Morris Sheppard 

Father of the Initiative and Referendum In __ _.„ „ _„ _ u « s - Senator from Texas 

Missouri Prof. Chas. Zueblin 

Robert M. La Follette Publicist and Lecturer 

U.S. Senator from Wisconsin M. Clyde Kelley 

Judge Ben B. Lindsey, Denver, Colo. Member of Congress from Pennsylvania 

Dr. John Randolph Haynes William Allen White 

Los Angeles, Cal „.„.., . Editor, Emporia, Kan., GautU 

Father of the Recall in California Frances Kellor 

Dr. Wm. Draper Lewis, Philadelphia, Pa. „,. , . _, . XT ,. . - , 

Samuel Gompers Chief of Progressive National Service 

President of American Federation of Labor Carl Vrooman, Bloomington, 111. 

Moses E. Clapp Lieut. C. P. Shaw, Virginia 

w u - s - Senator from Minnesota George H. Duncan. New Hampshire 

yvoodbridge N. Ferris ^^^ q{ Michigan Jambs W. Bucelin, Grand Junction. Colo. 

George H. Hodges Father of Grand Junction System of Prefer- 

Ex-Governor of Kansas ential Voting. 



Entered at the Philadelphia Post Office as Second-class Matter 



Single copies, 15 cents; 50 cents per year; three years, SI. To facilitate the spread of the causes 
represented by this magazine 1 , four yearly subscriptions will be sent to different addresses for $1; 
special rates for yearly subscriptions or single numbers for propaganda purposes supplied on applic- 
ation. 

(For July Issue, 1915) 

STATE MENT 

of the ownership and management of Equity published quarterly at 1520 Chest- 
nut Street, Philadelphia, Pa., required by the Act of August 24, 1912. 

Editor, Managing Editor, Business Manager and Publisher, C. F. Taylor, 1520 

Chestnut Street. 
Owner, C. F. Taylor, 1520 Chestnut Street. 

No bondholders or mortgagees. C. F. TAYLOR. 

Sworn to and subscribed before me this 10th day of March, 1915. 

MARY E. HAMER, Notary Public. 
My commission expires January 25, 1916. 



JUL 20 1915 



EDITORIAL 



VOL. XVII— No. 3 July, 1915 



Standardizing State Constitutions 
A foreign investigator coming to 
our country would doubtless be im- 
pressed by the similarity in our 48 
state constitutions. He would find 
that they all provide for a governor, 
popularly elected, two legislative 
houses, the members of which are 
elected by districts, and a "separation 
of the powers" of government into leg- 
islative, executive and judicial. This 
type was established early, and is 
clung to as a sort of political re- 
ligion. 

But as soon as we inquire into the 
details of any one of these uniform 
features, we find diversity. For ex- 
ample, the length of the term for 
governor varies from one year to 
four. Half (24) of the states give 
the governor a four-year term; 22 
give a two-year term, and one (New 
Jersey) gives a three-year term, 
while Massachusetts elects a gover- 
nor every year. Here we have variety 
without any particular reason. There 
is nothing magical about any partic- 
ular length of term. The old id<*a 
was to avoid too long a term in order 
to prevent abuse of power. The con- 
stitution of Massachusetts is very 
old, hence this very old idea concern- 
ing the length of the governor's 
term persists. Too short a term 
cannot favor efficiency, owing to lack 
of experience in so short a term. 
True, the incumbent may be re- 
elected, but the trouble and expense 
of a state campaign every year is 
not attractive. There has been no 
complaint of length of term in the 
four-year states. Indeed a longer 
term, with the privilege of the recall, 
would favor still greater efficiency 



than the four-year term, and at the 
same time the abuse of power could 
be prevented. 

There is still greater variety in the 
powers of the governor in the differ- 
ent states. The governor of North 
Carolina has no veto power. All the 
other governors may veto legislation, 
but the vote in the legislature neces- 
sary to overcome a veto varies; eight 
states require only a majority, thirty- 
four require a two-thirds vote, and 
five a three-fifths votev This vote 
must be recorded, yea and nay. The 
veto power may be still further par- 
ticularized thus: In thirty-four states 
the governor may veto items of ap- 
propriation bills, and three of these 
permit veto of a part or parts of any 
bill. The item veto represents a long 
struggle with the forces of corrup- 
tion. The time and conditions under 
which a governor may retain a bill 
before signing or vetoing, show al- 
most infinite variety in the 48 states. 
All these things could easily be 
standardized and made uniform. 

Thirty-five of the states have 
lieutenant governors, and in all but 
one of these, this officer is president 
of the state senate, just as the vice- 
president is president of the national 
senate. In the other states and in 
Massachusetts the senate elects its 
own presiding officer. Is there not 
room for some simple and easy 
standardizing here? 

The governor of Illinois has the 
largest salary — $12,000. Five states 
(Colorado, New Jersey, New York, 
Ohio, and Pennsylvania) pay $10,000. 
The others vary down to $2,500 (Ver- 
mont), sixteen of the states paying 
$5,000. There is plain justification 
for this variation. 

In the evolution of state govern- 
ment in this country, perhaps the 
most prominent feature of change 
and improvement has been the re- 



148 



Equity 



markable increase in the power of 
the governor. And here is where 
still further change and improvement 
is most likely to occur. Progressive 
thinkers hold that governors should 
have longer terms, be paid better sal- 
aries, have the power of appointment 
of all the state administrative officers 
with power of removal, and be given 
a place in the legislature to propose 
and advocate legislation. An officer 
with such power and with a long 
term should certainly be subject to 
the Recall. It is perhaps in this di- 
rection that the executive department 
of state government in this country 
will be standardized, if at all. 
The Legislative Branch 

The legislative department of state 
government in our 48 states consists 
uniformly of two houses, a senate 
and a house of representatives, the 
members of both houses being pop- 
ularly elected from districts. The 
total membership of the 48 legisla- 
tures numbers 7,347; 1,746' are state 
senators, and 5,601 are members of 
the lower house. The most fitting 
comment that can be made on this 
great number of law makers is to 
mention the equally surprising fact 
that at each session of these 48 
legislatures (biennial, as a rule) be- 
tween 50,000 and 60,000 bills are in- 
troduced for consideration, and about 
one-third of these finally become law. 
However, these are massed facts, and 
startling in their nature. 

What we want is detailed facts 
that might lead to suggestions as to 
some desirable standard. The largest 
senate is that of Minnesota, consist- 
ing of 62 members; the smallest that 
of Delaware, consisting of 17 mem- 
bers. The difference in the size of 
this body in the various states is not 
so very wide, but the size of the 
senate has very little if any relation 
to the population of the states. Wy- 



oming has less population than Dela- 
ware, and has 27 senators; Nevada, 
with less than half the population of 
Delaware, has 22 senators. New 
York, with the highest population 
(more than four times that of Minn- 
esota), has 51 senators. Texas, with 
3,896,542 population, has 31 sen- 
ators; and Ohio, with 4,767,121 pop- 
ulation, has 33 senators. 

The numbers constituting the low- 
er house of the different states show 
a much more striking irregularity. 
The smallest houses are those of 
Arizona and Delaware, with 35 
members each. The largest is that 
of New Hampshire, with 405 mem- 
bers. Connecticut has 258, Vermont 
243 and Massachusetts 240. New 
York, the most populous state, has 
150 in the house. 

The members of Congress from 
each state are strictly in proportion 
to population. But there has never 
been any attempt to standardize the 
state legislatures according to pop- 
ulation or anything else. Every state 
stands by itself. And there is no 
steady nor even approximate propor- 
tion in the size of the two houses in 
relation to each other. California 
has 40 in the senate and 80 in the 
house — the lower house double the 
number of the upper house. Indiana 
has 50 to 100; Oregon, 30 to 60. No 
other states have this 2 to 1 ratio. 
Illinois has 51 to 153; Tennessee, 33 
to 99. No other states have the 3 
to 1 ratio. Massachusetts has 40 to 
240, a 6 to 1 ratio. The other states 
have no ratio at all that can be ex- 
pressed in simple figures, and no uni- 
formity one with another. For ex- 
ample, Louisiana has 41 to 119. 

So while all the states have a leg- 
islative branch consisting of two 
houses, there the uniformity ceases. 
The details break up into all sorts of 
variations, with no uniformity nor 



Editorial 



149 



ratio in the variations. In seeking 
for a standard legislative department 
for states, would it not be well to in- 
quire how the present plan has work- 
ed? and if a different plan would 
promise better results? 

There is no good reason why the 
two-house system should be used by 
states. The two-house system in 
England was for the purpose of 
representing the titled classes in the 
House of Lords, and the masses of 
the people in the House of Commons. 
In our Congress, the states are repre- 
sented in the Senate, and the people 
in the House of Representatives — 
representatives on basis of popula- 
tion. Neither of these reasons exist, 
nor any other, for state legislatures 
to consist of two houses. The mem- 
bers of both houses are elected from 
districts, and the districts are estab- 
lished according to population. So 
not only the same kind of voters, but 
the identical voters, and the same 
interests are represented in both 
houses — double representation. 

Not only is there no reason for two 
legislative houses in state govern- 
ment, but it is unduly awkward, in- 
direct and expensive. Instead of 
proving an obstruction to bad legisla- 
tion it obstructs more good legisla- 
tion than bad, for the reason that 
politicians and special interests know 
better how to surmount the diffi- 
culties than the "first termers," who 
usually essay to represent the public 
interests. There being no co-ordina- 
tion between the two houses, obstruc- 
tion is easy until the time limit ap- 
proaches or expires. The time limit 
varies from 40 to 90 days, there be- 
ing no limit in 16 states. But even 
where there is no limit, there is al- 
ways an agreement as to the date of 
adjournment, so there is always a 
mad rush and hot haste during the 
last few days of every session, dur- 



ing which time the major portion of 
the legislation of the session receives 
its finishing touches. This is the di- 
rect opposite to the deliberate at- 
mosphere in which legislation should 
be considered and decided. 

The following indictments can be 
made against the present plan and 
method of state legislation. There is 
no reason for the two-house system. 
The membership is entirely too large, 
even if one of the houses be abolish- 
ed. The sessions are too brief, the 
salary is inadequate, and the terms 
are too short, (two years usually). 
The vast majority of members are 
"first-termers," never having served 
before in a legislative body, and not 
expecting to do so again; hence, they 
are entirely unprepared for the re- 
sponsible and difficult task of making 
laws for a state, and entirely with- 
out experience. 

With all the inherent weaknesses 
of our present plan of state legisla- 
tion, it is wonderful that we have 
gotten along as well as we have. If 
the one-house system should be 
adopted by abolishing one of the 
present houses, the senate is the one 
that should be retained, chiefly be- 
cause it is not as excessive in size 
as the lower house. But it would be 
better if a new start be made by 
abolishing both houses and establish- 
ing a new legislative branch, planned 
to produce the best results. It should 
be small in numbers, its members 
should have some preparation for 
their duties, be carefully selected, 
given good salaries, and long terms 
to attract good men, but subject to 
the Recall to avoid the danger of a 
bad choice for a long term. These 
men should be always considering 
legislation. They should give their 
entire attention to the public service, 
have frequent meetings, publish the 
laws under consideration, have an 



150 



Equity 



open calendar, give hearings on pro- 
posed laws, and instead of sudden 
legislation, give long notice as to 
final vote on any proposed statute, 
in the meantime be open to sug- 
gestions by mail and otherwise. Then 
we might have as few new laws as 
Switzerland (less than a dozen an- 
nually), and they would be well con- 
sidered. If some state should adopt 
some such plan as this, it would shine 
so brightly in comparison with the 
present plan, that the new plan would 
rapidly become the standard. 

The municipalities of this country 
also copied the double-house system 
without any reason therefor. Of 
course it did not work well because 
there was no reason for it. There 
being no reason for it, as a natural 
consequence there were many reasons 
against it; but it was blindly per- 
sisted in. And the division of the 
powers was also copied and as blind- 
ly persisted in, though in the manage- 
ment of private corporations the 
powers and responsibilities were con- 
centrated instead of separated. About 
a decade ago a light began to shine, 
and municipalities began to adopt a 
single-house legislature of small 
membership (usually five persons), 
and the executive powers and duties 
were placed in the same hands. Here 
was a revolution — a radical change 
from the old standard to the opposite 
of the old standard. Now a modifica- 
tion of the same movement is begin- 
ning, by which the small legislative 
body (commission) gives up the 
actual administrative functions into 
the hands of a "city manager," chos- 
en by the commission. This "man- 
ager" acts under the authority of the 
commission, executes the ordinances 
passed by the commission, chooses 
his own subordinates, but he may 
himself be discharged by the com- 
mission. There are those who be- 



lieve that the new standards in munic- 
ipal government fore-shadow what 
must become the new standard in 
state government. If so, the state 
executive of the future will not be a 
popularly elected governor with in- 
creased powers, as suggested in the 
early part of this article, but a pro- 
fessional administrator, or state 
manager, chosen perhaps for an inde- 
finite term, by a small, single-cham- 
ber legislative body which will also 
have executive functions. 

The Judicial Department 
Appointment of judges by gover- 
nor or legislature and life tenure 
were specified by the early constitu- 
tions. The supposed "democracy" of 
the middle of the 19th century de- 
manded popular election of judges 
and a limited term. If the writer 
may venture to prohesy, he will 
hazzard the opinion that the manner 
of choosing judges provided for in 
the future "standard" state constitu- 
tion will be appointment by the new 
style single-chamber legislature, or 
by the responsible state executive; 
or perhaps more likely, the chief 
justice will be so chosen, he to choose 
his associates; and the supreme 
bench to choose the minor judges 
throughout the state; an indefinite 
term for all, with a retiring age but 
no retirement until after at least ten 
years of service, all judges being 
subject to the Recall. This plan would 
take the judiciary out of party 
politics, give the judiciary system co- 
herence and permanence, and yet it 
would be subject to the control of the 
electorate if control were ever nec- 
essary, which would be very unlikely. 



A multitude of complicated, con- 
fused and confusing laws, made by 
one state authority for another state 
authority to execute, cannot result in 
g-ood judgment. 



Editorial 151 

A PROPOSED CONSTITUTION FOR THE STATE OF NEW YORK. 



[The following constitution is proposed by the Referendum League 
of Erie County, 68 Erie County Bank Building, Buffalo, for the state of New 
York. It was prepared by Albert H. Jackson, Esq., 55 Huntington Ave., 
Buffalo. It has been published in pamphlet form, with full explanations and 
discussions of the points raised. The above details are carefully given so 
that those who are interested may pursue the matter further by writing for 
the pamphlet, and by direct correspondence^ — Editor, EQUITY.] 

We, the People of the State of New York, grateful to Almighty God 
for our freedom, in order to secure its blessings, do establish this con- 
stitution: 

Section 1. The legislative power of this state shall be vested in the 
assembly; and all other governmental power shall be vested in the as- 
sembly and such other officers and agents as may be designated by law; 
but the electors reserve to themselves the power to propose laws and 
amendments to this constitution, and to enact or reject the same at the 
polls, independent of the assembly, and also reserve power at their option 
to approve or reject at the polls any legislative act of the assembly. 
All laws enacted by the assembly must receive the affirmative votes of 
a majority of all the members elected to the assembly. 

Section 2. The assembly shall consist of fifty-one members, and shall 
be chosen for four years, unless a shorter or indeterminate period shall 
be fixed by law. 

Section 3. The state shall be divided into fifty-one districts to be call- 
ed assembly districts, each of which shall choose one assemblyman, who 
shall be a resident elector of the district. The districts shall be num- 
bered from one to fifty-one inclusive. 

District number one (1) shall consist of the counties of Suffolk and 
Richmond. 

(Describe the fifty-one districts. The present senate districts can be 
used, if desired.) 

Section 4. No legislative act of the assembly, except such orders or 
resolutions as pertain solely to facilitating the performance of the busi- 
ness of the assembly, or of any committee or officer thereof, or to appropri- 
ating money therefor, or for the payment of salaries fixed by law, shall 
take effect until ninety days after the same has been published in a news- 
paper or bulletin designated by law as the official paper; unless in case 
of emergency the assembly shall, by the affirmative vote of three-fourths 
of all its members, otherwise direct, and the facts constituting the emer- 
gency shall be expressed in the preamble of the act. No property rights 
shall become vested in any person or corporation under any act contain- 
ing the emergency clause. No law shall grant any privilege, franchise 
or immunity, except upon the condition that the same may be amended 
or repealed at any time, and the privilege, franchise or immunity may 
be annulled. 

Section 5. Upon the written petition signed by not less than fifty 
thousand electors and filed in the office of the secretary of state, or in 
such other office as may be designated by law within ninety days after 



152 Equity 

publication of a legislative act in the official newspaper or bulletin, as 
prescribed in the preceding section, requesting that such legislative act 
or part thereeof, passed by the assembly, be referred to the people of 
the state, such legislative act, or part thereof, as is specified in such 
petition shall not take effect until the same has been ratified by a majority 
of the electors voting thereon at a general or special election. As soon 
as a legislative act or part thereof has beeen suspended by petition in 
the manner aforesaid, the governor, or other official designated by law, 
shall give notice thereof by public proclamation, and of the time when 
such legislative act or part thereof is to be voted on by the electors, 
which shall be at the next general election occurring not less than sixty 
days after the filing of such petition, or at such special election as may be 
provided for by law. 

Section 6. The electors may propose to the assembly for its consid- 
eration any bill which they wish to be enacted into law, by written petition 
signed by not less than seventy-five thousand electors and addressed to 
the assembly, and filed in the office of the secretary of state, or other 
office designated by law. Any bill thus proposed by the electors, unless 
enacted without change by the assembly, shall be submitted to the voters 
at the next general election occurring not less than six months after 
filing of said petition, or at such special election as may be provided for by 
law; and if it receives a majority of the votes cast for and against it, it 
shall thereupon become a law. But the assembly, if it does not enact 
such bill as requested, may submit to the electors with any such bill so 
petitioned for, another bill on the same subject, in an amended and dif- 
ferent form, and in such manner that the electors can choose between the 
competing measures or reject both. The submission shall be in the fol- 
lowing form: 



For Bill Proposed by- 
Electors 



For Bill Proposed by 
Assembly 



Against Both Bills 



The elector may place a cross (X) mark in either of the first two 
coulmns, and in the third column if he so chooses. If a majority of the 
ballots upon the bills have the cross (X) mark in the third column, both 
bills shall be defeated. If a majority of the ballots upon the bills do not 
have the cross (X) mark in the third column, the bill receiving the highest 
number of votes becomes law. Any elector may vote for one of the bills 
and against both, thus indicating, though he desires neither, his preference 
in case one of the bills is to be enacted. If the bill petitioned for by 
the electors is enacted by the assembly without change, it shall not be 
submitted to the voters, unless in pursuance of a demand made by petition 
in accordance with the preceding section. No law which has been initiated 
by petition as herein provided, whether the same has been enacted by 
the assembly, or by a vote of the electors, shall be repealed by the 
assembly, unless such repealing act is submitted to the electors and 
receives a favorable majority of the votes cast for and against the same. 



Editorial 153 

Section 7. Laws shall be enacted for the purpose of facilitating and 
carrying out the preceding sections. Petitions signed by the electors 
may be in sections, but each section shall contain the full description of 
the measure on which a vote is demanded. The names signed to the 
petition shall be those of duly registered electors, and the authenticity 
of such names shall be verified by the affidavits of any persons who wit- 
nessed such signatures, or by the acknowledgement of the perons signing 
the petitions, and the petitions shall be accompanied by a certificate of 
the officer or officers having charge of the elections in each county that 
the names signed to such petitions are those of duly registered electors 
in such county. Such certificates shall be conclusive of the facts therein 
stated, unless controverted in a direct proceeding brought within thirty 
days after the making of such certificates. 

Section 8. Until laws are enacted providing further regulations for 
facilitating and carrying out the provisions of this constitution relating 
to voting upon measures submitted upon the petition of the electors, the 
election officers and other officials shall be governed by the provisions 
of this constitution and of the general laws, supplemented by such rea- 
sonable action as may be necessary to render the preceding sections 
self -executing. 

Section 9. The assembly may enact laws, and submit the same to the 
electors, and provide that the same shall take effect only when approved 
by a majority of the electors voting thereon. 

Section 10. Any municipality or other political subdivision of the 
state may be authorized by law to conduct its own affairs, and to legislate 
upon such subjects affecting itself and its inhabitants as may be pre- 
scribed by law. 

Section 11. Every citizen of the age of twenty-one years, who shall 
have been a citizen for ninety days, and an inhabitant of this state one 
year next preceding an election, and for the last four months a resident 
of the county and for the last thirty days a resident of the election district 
in which he or she may offer his vote, except such as may be serving 
a term of imprisonment, after his or her conviction for a crime, shall be; 
entitled to vote at such election in the election district of which he or 
she shall at the time be a resident, and not elsewhere, for all officers 
that now are or hereafter may be elective by the people; and upon all 
measures which may be submitted to the vote of the electors, provided that 
in time of war no elector in the actual military service of the 
state or of the United States, in the army or navy threeof, shall be de- 
prived of his or her vote by reason of his or her absence from such 
election district; and the law shall provide the manner in which, the time 
and place at which such absent voters may vote, and for the return and 
canvass of their vote in the election districts in which they respectively 
reside. 

Section 12. Any amendment to this constitution may be proposed by 
a petition of seventy-five thousand electors, in the same manner that a 
bill may be proposed by the electors under section six of this constitution; 
and an amendment to this constitution may be proposed by a majority 
of the members elected to the assembly. Any such amendment, however 



154 Equity 

proposed, shall be submitted to the electors at a general or special elec- 
tion, and if a majority of the electors voting thereon approve such amend- 
ment, it shall thereupon become a part of the constitution. When an 
amendment is proposed by the electors, the assembly may propose an 
amendment on the same subject in an amended form or different form, 
and the two amendments shall be submitted to the electors in such 
manner that they can choose between them, as provided for submission of 
competing bills to the electors by section six. 

Section 13. The constitution existing prior to the adoption of this 
constitution is hereby repealed as a constitution, but it shall have the 
force of statute law, except where it is inconsistent with this constitution, 
until the same or parts thereof are repealed, expressly or by implica- 
tion, by ordinary legislation. 



ANOTHER PROPOSED CONSTITUTION. 



[The editor of this magazine also proposes a constitution for the State 
of New York, but he hastens to say, as Mr. Jackson says in his pamphlet, 
that it is a rough draft, with no claim to perfection. It is mainly sug- 
gestive.] 

For the more efficient government of this commonwealth, we, the 
people of the state of New York, do establish this constitution. 

ARTICLE I. 
BILL OF RIGHTS: — All the personal rights, privileges, liberties and 
immunities granted by the United States constitution are hereby guaran- 
teed to the citizens of this state. 

ARTICLE II. 
Every male citizen of this state not less than twenty-one years of 
age shall be entitled to vote. Other limitations and qualifications may 
be imposed by law. 

ARTICLE III. 

1. The highest state court shall divide the state into eight electoral 
districts of approximately equal population according to the last official 
census, each district being of contiguous territory and as nearly symmet- 
rical in shape as circumstance will permit. 

2. On the first Tuesday in May of every fourth year three Counselors 
shall be elected from each electoral district on a non-partizan ballot, 
allowing every voter one vote for one candidate, but not necessarily in his 
own district, the three candidates for Counselor in each district having 
the highest votes being thereby declared elected. Whenever a tie vote 
for the third highest shall occur, that place or those places in any district 
or districts shall thereby remain vacant, and shall be filled by secret bal- 
lot of the entire Couucil during the first week of the first session follow- 
ing the election, from those candidates having said tie votes from said 
district or districts. 

3. The duties of the Council shall be to make laws subject to the 



Editorial 155 

following limitations, and other functions provided by this document. 
Any law which shall receive a majority vote of the council after its 
second reading shall enter upon a probation period of six months. Im- 
mediately after said passage the proposed law shall be printed in full, 
with the vote for and against, and a statement in its favor not exceeding 
1,000 words by those Counsellors who voted in its favor, and a state- 
ment against by those Counsellors who voted against it, together with 
the exact date of the final vote. This document shall be printed at public 
expense, in sufficient numbers to supply it free upon request to the press 
of the state, to organizations in the state of any sort whatever, and to 
individual voters in the state. To favor the spread of information, a rea- 
sonable number of requests from outside the state many be honored. More 
than one proposed law may be put on probation in the same document. 

4. The Council shall appoint a committee consisting of one of its 
own members who voted for the bill and one who voted against, and 
this committee may appoint a referee, a citizen of the state not a member 
of the Council, who shall serve without pay, but who may claim actual 
expenses incurred as allowed by the two official members of the commit- 
tee and which shall be published in detail with the report of the committee. 
The duty of said committee shall be to receive and tabulate all the sug- 
gestions concerning said proposed law, and report same in a clear and 
systematic statement to the entire Council in session every thirty days 
after the formal proposal of the same. 

5. If, during said six months probation, 50,000 legal voters of the 
state, not more than 10,000 from any one county, shall petition in writing 
to the said committee against the passage of said proposed law, then it 
must be dropped; or if passed by the Council, it shall be subject to a 
referendum vote at the next state election, and it shall become law only 
upon favorable vote of a majority voting on said measure at said election. 
But said petitioners may, in said petition, propose alterations of or addi- 
tions to said bill. If said bill, with such alteratons and additions as have 
been petitioned for incorporated there-in, shall pass the Council by 
majority vote of all its members, then it shall become law. But the 
Council may pass any portion or portions of said proposed law not af- 
fected by the demands of the petitioners, in which event said portion or 
portions shall become law, and the demands petitioned for shall pass to 
a referendum. If there shall be two such petitions, each demanding dif- 
ferent alterations, then the Council shall vote on the parts of the bill 
not affected by either petition, and if favored by a majority of the Council, 
said portions shall become law. And at the next state election the changes 
demanded by both of the petitions shall be referred to the voters in such 
a way that they can first vote if either demand shall become law; and 
second if either, which one. If a majority of the votes cast on the first 
proposition shall be negative, then both shall be lost. But if a majority 
of the votes cast on the first proposition shall be favorable, then the de- 
mand or demands receiving the greatest number of votes shall become 
law. If it should be deemed impracticable by the Council to separate the 
originally proposed law from the demanded alterations, the entire proposed 
law as modified by both petitions shall be submitted as described. 



156 Equity 

6. At the end of the six months probation, the entire Council shall re- 
consider the proposed law, along with any suggestions from any interests or 
voters in the state that may have been reported to it by the special com- 
mittee to receive and report such suggestions. If no referendum petition 
has been received by the committee, then the Council is free to act as it 
desires upon said proposed law. But if it shall be passed, and as finally 
passed it contains distinct changes from the originally published proposi- 
tion, it shall not go into effect until 90 days after said passage. It shall 
immediately be republished in the same manner as the original publication, 
and if within said 90 days a petition in writing of 50,000 voters, not more 
than 10,000 from any one county, shall be received by the President of the 
Council protesting against said law or any portion or portions of the same, 
then any portion or portions of the proposed law not petitioned against 
shall go into effect at the end of said 90 days, and the law or any portion 
or portions of the same petitioned against shall be held in abeyance and 
submitted to a referendum at the next state election; and if a majority of 
the votes cast thereon are affirmative, said proposed law or any portion or 
portions of the same shall become law, but not otherwise. 

7. Upon petition in writing of 60,000 legal voters of the state, not 
more than 10,000 from any one county, the Council shall consider any pro- 
posed law; and if not passed as submitted within three months of its 
receipt, it shall be referred by the Council to the voters at the next state 
election. But the Council may submit a competing proposition, and in 
that event both shall be submitted at the next election in such way that 
the voters may vote against both as well as for either. But the petition 
shall contain the names of five voters who shall be called proposers. These 
proposers shall have full authority to consider minor changes or amend- 
ments proposed by the Council, and if thus finally passed by a majority of 
the Council, it shall become law after the 90 days interval for a possible 
referendum demand. 

8. An emergency measure, so declared in the preamble passed by a 
seven-eighths vote of the Council, the measure itself passing by a three- 
fourths vote of the Council, shall go into immediate effect. But if chal- 
lenged by a referendum petition of 50,000 voters, not more than 10,000 
being from any one county, said measure shall be referred to the voters 
at the next state election, and if a majority of the votes cast thereon shall 
be negative, then said law shall be repealed; but not otherwise. 

9. The Council shall meet on the first Tuesday in every calendar 
month, and shall remain in session as long as the public inter- 
ests shall require. July or August, either or both, of any year, may be 
excepted, by a three-fourths vote of the Council. Committees of investi- 
gation concerning any state interest may be appointed by the Council from 
its membership. 

10. Each Counselor shall receive for his services an annual salary of 
ten thousand dollars. No Counselor shall hold any other office, nor pursue 
any private vocation. Every Counselor shall give his entire time to the 
duties of his office. No counselor shall have any pecuniary interest in any 
firm that takes public contracts of any kind or that furnishes supplies to 



Editorial 157 

any public department or institution. Counselors are eligible for re-election 
indefinitely. 

ARTICLE IV. 

1. A Governor shall be elected on a non-partizan ballot on the first 
Tuesday in May of every fourth year. If there are more than two candi- 
dates for Governor, every voter may signify on the ballot his first choice, 
his second choice and his third choice. If any candidate has a majority of 
first choice votes, he shall be declared elected. If not, the first and second 
choice votes for each candidate shall be added together. If it shall be found 
that any candidate has a majority of first and second choice votes, he shall 
be declared elected. But if not, then the first, second and third choice 
votes of each candidate shall be added together, and the candidate having 
•the greatest number of first, second and third choice votes shall be declared 
elected. 

2. The Governor shall be president of the Council and shall have 
a vote in case of a tie vote. He may propose legislation, and may enter 
into the discussions on legislation, some member of the Council being temp- 
orarily in the chair. He shall have veto power, including the veto of items 
in an appropriation bill and portions of a proposed law. But a two-thirds 
vote of the Council shall prevail over his veto. He shall not veto meas- 
ures enacted by popular vote. 

3. The Governor shall be responsible for the administration of all 
laws. He shall appoint the heads of all state administrative departments. 

4. All state administrative departments shall be created by law, and 
laws shall be made concerning their operation. But until new legislation 
under this instrument shall have been enacted, the present laws concern- 
ing departmental administration, both constitutional and statutory, shall be 
in force. 

ARTICLE V. 

1. Within the first three years of operation of the state government 
under this instrument, the courts of the state shall be reorganized by the 
Council. After such reorganization, the judges of the highest state court 
shall be appointed by the Council with the consent of the Governor. All 
other state judges shall be appointed by the Council with the consent of the 
Governor and a majority vote of the highest state court. The salary of all 
state judges shall be determined by law. The term of all state judges 
shall be indeterminate, subject to retirement on two-thirds salary either 
voluntarily or by majority vote of the Council at any time after the age of 
70 years, provided service has been rendered for at least ten years. Any 
state judge may be recalled by a three-fourths vote of the Council, without 
reasons being given. Upon written request of 50,000 legal voters, not 
more than 10,000 of same from any one county, such vote concerning any 
judge or judges named in the petition shall be taken by the Council. Juris- 
diction of all state courts shall be established by the Council. 

ARTICLE VI. 

1. All cities, towns, villages and counties shall be free to govern 
themselves except in so-far as the Council may find it necessary or ex- 
pedient to pass general laws, which shall apply impartially to all like 
political sub-divisions. 



158 Equity 

2. The Council shall not establish boards or commissions for the 
regulation of state public institutions,, corporations, etc. This kind of 
work shall be done by small committees appointed by the Council from its 
own membership, which committees may be permitted to employ experts, 
and shall report to the full Council. 

ARTICLE VII. 
1. The portions of the existing constitution that this instrument re- 
places that are not inconsistent with this instrument shall remain as 
statute law until repealed. 

ARTICLE VIII. 
1. This constitution may be amended by a constitutional convention, 
which may be called by a two-thirds vote of the Council or on demand by 
written petition of 100,000 legal voters of the state. The convention, 
when called, may submit to the electorate amendments to this instrument 
or a new instrument to take its place. Amendments shall be submitted on 
demand by a written petition of 100,000 legal voters of the state, or by a 
three-fourths vote of the Council. Amendments to this constitution or a 
new constitution to replace this instrument, shall be deemed carried if 
three-fifths of the voters voting there-on shall vote in the affirmative, 
but not otherwise. 



Comment 

The writer agrees with Mr. Jack- 
son that it would probably be better 
to have the chief executive officer of 
the state chosen by the Council; but 
the time is not ripe for that. The 
people like to elect their chief execu- 
tive, and call him "governor." The 
cost of legislation would be consider- 
ably below the cost of legislation by 
the present process ($240,000 as com- 
pared to over $300,000), and incom- 
parably better laws would be produc- 
ed, and the government under them 
would be incomparably simpler and 
more just. Attention is particularly 
called to the deliberate process of 
evolving laws here-in provided; also 
to the manner of selecting judges, 
their security on the bench, but yet 
not beyond the reach of the people 
or their representatives. 

Dividing the state in)to electoral 
districts as required, is a judicial 
function. Hence the placing of this 
duty in the hands of the highest 
state court. 



If the state were divided into sin- 
gle member districts, each voter would 
have one vote for only one represent- 
ative. In larger districts with three 
members each, there is no reason why 
the voter should have any more than 
one vote for one candidate, and there 
are many reasons why he should be 
so restricted. But it is not a restric- 
tion; he should not seek to have 
more than one representative in the 
legislature. By present methods he 
is lucky if he gets that. If two 
candidates were elected from each 
district, and if the voters of the state 
divided into parties (at present they 
divide into national parties, which is 
wrong), two leading parties could 
get all the seats, since the leading 
minority party could easily get a seat 
from every district, which would be 
unfair to the majority. We wish to 
give representation to the minority, 
but not equal to the majority. Elect- 
ing three candidates from each dis- 
trict, with one vote for one candidate 
for each voter, would certainly give 



Editorial 



159 



one representative from each district 
to the majority party, and quite as 
certainly give the same to a minority 
party of considerable strength, leav- 
ing the third representative from 
each district uncertain as to party, 
giving opportunity to some candidate 
in each district who would draw sup- 
port from all parties, for reasons of 
high character and personal fitness. 
Not confining voters to candidates 
in their district would give oppor- 
tunity for the voters of a minor 
state party (as the Prohibitionists) 
to unite on a candidate in some one 
district and carry him to victory by 
votes from all parts of the state. 
This .would be fair to the voters of 
the minor party, as in a state elec- 
tion they should have the opportunity 



to secure a state representative if 
they have sufficient votes to justify 
it. And such a plan would not be 
unjust to any other party. 

True, this plan of three member 
districts with one vote for one candi- 
date to each voter is not as accurate 
in its results as would be Propor- 
tional Representation by the Hare 
system. But it is an easy method of* 
avoiding the gross evils of our pres- 
ent plan of electing representatives. 
It is the easiest and most readily 
adoptable plan that the writer is 
able to propose, as a mid-way step 
between the present evils and the 
perfection of Proportional Represen- 
tation, which is to be hoped for some 
time in the future. 



Light on State Constitutions 
This is one of the most important 
subjects of the present, and this* is by 
far the most informative and helpful 
book on the subject of state consti- 
tutions that has yet appeared. It 
is admirable in every way. To point 
out its excellencies would be to point 
to every page. This book will save 
to every student of state constitu- 
tions much reading and comparisons 
of constitutions. All this work is 
here done and presented to the read- 
er in clear and systematized form. 
Every delegate or aspiring delegate 
to a state constitutional convention 
should make this book his companion. 
A comparative analysis of all our 
state constitutions, both in present 
and past forms, is no small task. 
This the author accomplishes with 
astonishing brevity; and what is still 
more unusual, he makes such matter 
so interesting that it would almost 
attract the popular reader. 

While the author interprets con- 
stitutional history accurately, he also 



interprets present tendencies, and is 
bold enough to outline the desirable 
constitution of the future. He says that 
the old type of state constitution has 
about served its purpose, and that 
important changes in state govern- 
ment are probable in the near future. 
Whether we agree with the author's 
views or not as to the desirable 
state constitution of the future, his 
views are interesting and the writer 
believes them to be important, and 
sound in the main. No one interested 
in state constitutions can afford to 
be without this book. 
* American State Constitutions, Growth 
of American State Constitutions from 
1776 to the end of 1914. By James 
Quayle Dealey, Ph. D., Professor of 
Social and Political Science In 
Brown University. Ginn & Co., Bos- 
ton. $1.40. 



Shall a "Bill of Rights" be Included 
in a Modern State Constitution? 

[On page 294 of Prof. Dealey's ad- 
mirable book on "American State 
Constitutions," the author favors the 



160 



Equity 



continuation of bills of rights in 
state constitutions, and expresses a 
hope that a revised and modern bill 
may be inserted in some constitution 
"as a model for the twentieth cen- 
tury, as that of Virginia was for the 
eighteenth century." 

The editor of this magazine be- 
lieves that bills of rights are no 
longer necessary, as the individual 
rights developed long ago are now 
safely imbedded in the common law. 
But he thinks that it might be well 
to insert in state constitutions a brief 
adoption of the "rights" expressed 
in our national constitution, in order 
to put on authoritative record, desir- 
able harmony between the national 
constitution and the state constitu- 
tions. Upon reading page 294 above 
mentioned, he wrote to Prof. Dealey 
asking him to kindly express himself 
more fully upon this subject than on 
page 294 of his book, for the readers 
of Equity. It is with gratification 
that the following is presented, and 
it is hoped that Prof. Dealey or some 
one else will soon give us the "terse 
and eloquent phraseology" that he 
speaks of.— C. F. T.] 
Dr. Charles Fremont Taylor, 

Philadelphia, Pa ; 

My dear Sir: Replying to your 
letter of June eleventh respecting a 
bill of rights, I would say that I 
should not favor the Article you 
suggest (1) as a substitution for the 
usual bill of rights in a state con- 
stitution. Such an Article if adopt- 
ed generally by the States, would 
result in the standardization of 
rights, as given in the national con- 
stitution and interpreted by the fed- 
eral courts. Yet in many state con- 
stitutions there are elaborations of 

(1) "All the personal rights, priv- 
ileges, liberties and immunities grant- 
ed by the United States constitution 
are hereby guaranteed to the citizens 
of this state." 



such rights, for example, as re- 
ligious freedom, jury trials and com- 
pensations under eminent domain, 
and these local variations are in my 
opinion often superior to the state- 
ments contained in the national 
amendments. Furthermore, our mod- 
ern bills of rights contain not merely 
personal, but collective rights also, 
and these latter are not found in 
the national constitution. As our 
political thought is rapidly becoming 
collective rather than individualistic 
as formerly, such rights should pass 
into state constitutions, as the need 
arises, and can do so much more 
easily than into our rigid national 
constitution. As illustrations of col- 
lective rights, for example, would be 
included those modern extensions of 
the police power aiming to safeguard 
health and morals, such as regula- 
tion of hours of labor in dangerous 
occupations, or the labor of women 
and children, or minimum wage re- 
quirements. In other words I look 
on a bill of rights as still in process 
of growth, not as a fixed mass of 
rights already attained. 

Obviously such rights might be 
inserted in the main body of the con- 
stitution and a bill of rights omitted, 
but there is a sort of psychological 
argument against this. A bill of 
rights has behind it a thousand 
years of history, patriotic associa- 
tions cluster about it, and provisions 
inserted in it seem more sacred, 
more fundamental, than if inserted 
in an ordinary Article. Accordingly, 
I should prefer to retain a revised 
bill of rights in each state constitu- 
tion, partly for sentimental reasons 
but also so as to have in succinct 
statement the rights, individual or 
collective, that any particular state 
in a given generation considers as 
its fundamentals in government. 
Each Bill in that case becomes a sort 



Editorial 



161 



of synopsis of the principles elabor- 
ated in the other articles. It is worth 
while, for example, to see in a bill 
of rights the familiar collective 
right, "All political power is inherent 
in the people," and then to see how 
this is worked out in detail in the 
articles on suffrage, representation, 
and in the more recent provisions 
for the Initiative, Referendum and 
Recall. In other words, a bill of rights 
might well be revised each generation 
so as to omit obsolete provisions, but 
the revisers should also aim to em- 
body in a few provisions those rights 
and principles that represent the life 
and aspiration of the State. These 
should be expressed in terse and 
eloquent phraseology, so as to make 
them worthy of memorization for 
patriotic and inspirational purposes, 
and they should be as familiar to 
citizens as the first paragraph ~ of 
the Declaration of Independence used 
to be. 

J. Q. Dealey, 
Brown University, June 22nd, 1915. 



Our Blundering Lawmakers 

Every now and then the spot light 
of newspaper publicity reveals the 
net result of a session of one or an- 
other of our state legislatures. The 
Philadelphia Evening Bulletin, in its 
issue of May 4, begins an editorial 
entitled "Legislative Botching" as 
follows: 

"Following the discovery that the 
New Jersey Legislature had so badly 
bungled the woman suffrage special 
election bill as to require a special 
session to correct it, comes the in- 
formation from Trenton that out of 
the total of about 450 measures 
passed into Governor Fielder's hands, 
eighty-one were glaringly defective, 
or about one in every six. In this 
connection, too, it is interesting to 
note that there are thirty-four law- 



yers in the membership of the pres- 
ent Senate and House, not counting 
the number who hold jobs as clerks 
and secrataries, and many of them 
are young men, fresh from their re- 
searches and studies in the law 
schools and libraries." 

This looks pretty bad, and it is 
bad, but that is not to say that it is 
unusual. The fact is pretty well 
known to serious students and ex- 
perts in the art of government that 
most of our legislatures are doing 
just this sort of work. They are re- 
cruited each year from the ranks of 
the people by party organizations on 
lines of party expediency and with- 
out the slightest regard for partic- 
ular fitness or ability for the difficult 
and responsible business of lawmak- 
ing. Even when some few of these 
legislators, by reason of experience 
or special study, acquire a degree of 
expertness and capacity for this 
work, there is no assurance that they 
will be kept on the job. They are 
the merest sport of shifting political 
winds. 

One in every six laws enacted by 
this legislature defective! And yet 
the wonder is that there are not more 
mistakes considering the make-up of 
our legislatures. And 450 measures 
passed at this one session out of the 
1,280 introduced. In comparison with 
such a record as this, the legislation 
enacted through the popular Initia- 
tive stands forth with wonderful ad- 
vantage. In no instance thus far has 
a law enacted in any state through 
the initiative process been success- 
fully attacked before the courts. In 
point of numbers, there is no com- 
parison at all. This would indicate 
that when a large number of voters 
made up their minds to demand a 
certain measure, and realize that it 
must stand or fall as presented on 
the ballot, they see that it is impor- 



162 



Equity 



tant for them to secure the very best 
legislative ability in the construction 
of that measure. 

This comparison does not imply 
that the legislature should be dis- 
pensed with. On the contrary, it 
emphasizes the necessity of a legis- 
lature which, operating under the 
possibility of direct control by the 
voters, will be more responsible as to 
the character of its legislation, and 
more careful and scientific in its con- 
struction of measures to be enacted. 



The High Cost of Legislatures 

Those persons who doubt the wis- 
dom of enabling the people to take 
effective control of public affairs 
through the Initiative and Referen- 
dum sometimes raise the objection 
that the submission of measures to 
the voters entails considerable ex- 
penditure of public funds. It is, of 
course, undeniable that the provis- 
ion for initiative or referendum 
elections, in connection with the regu- 
lar state elections, entails some addi- 
tional expense. 

But it must always be borne in 
mind that the resort to these direct 
processes of legislation is due to 
some short-comings of the elected 
lawmakers. At least in the opinion 
of a considerable number of voters, 
the lawmakers must have been 
guilty of sins of commission or 
omission. Still it is not to be con- 
ceded that the cost of legislation, 
even when thus forced upon the vot- 
ers, is high in comparison with the 
expense of carrying on the existing 
legislatures. An instance in point is 
the 1915 session of the legislature 
of Pennsylvania, which, at this writ- 
ing, has not yet ended. The Phila- 
delphia Public Ledger, in an editorial 
on May 10th, spoke of this session as 
follows : 

The Legislature has been sitting 



since January, and by the time it ad- 
journs virtually four months will have 
passed from the time of actual getting 
down to business. Yet, up to date, it 
has been the custom of the Senate 
to sit only three days a week, and 
usually to hold but one session each 
day. Convene Monday night and ad- 
journ for the week on Wednesday; 
this has" been the rule. The House, 
as usual, has stuck a little more 
closely to business. But the point is 
that the General Assembly has been 
working only half time. Thousands 
of dollars have been wasted by paying 
House and Senate employes for six 
days a week, when they were actually- 
employed only three or four. Two 
months, instead of four, would have 
sufficed for all the Legislature has 
done or will do, provided lawmakers 
felt it incumbent upon them to work 
six days a week, like other people. 
Based upon figures for the 1913 ses- 
sion, such a course would have saved 
the State this year something like 
$100,000 in salaries alone. 

Waste of time and waste of money 
in printing ridiculous bills, which 
should never see the light, will easily 
account for nearly $1,000,000 in this 
session alone — an item not to be dis- 
regarded by a State which sees its 
income reduced and its appropriations 
cut. With an efficient Legislature 
saving this amount, Philadelphia's 
port appropriation would not have 
been cut from $1,000,000 to $250,000, 
or, to look at it another way, the 
State appropriation for the insane 
would not have been reduced and 
overcrowded asylums would be cer- 
tain of getting the necessary relief. 
But the Legislature is not alone to 
blame. These things have come upon 
us because collectively we regard with 
indulgence practices which none in- 
dividually would tolerate for a day on 
the farm, in the factory, or at the 
desk. 

Here is a lesson from the book of 
costly experience, well stated, and 
one which the people not only of 
Pennsylvania but of many of our 
states would do well to study. Has 
not the time come for intelligent 
citizens of all parties to get together 



Editorial 



163 



on a platform demanding that our 
state governments shall be conducted 
on a more businesslike and more 
efficient plan, with adequate provision 
for direct democratic control of men 
and measures by the voters as a safe- 
guard and check upon our officials? 



Why Smaller Legislatures? 

The idea that the state legislature 
of the future will be much smaller in 
numbers and reduced to a single 
chamber, composed of men specially 
fitted and well paid for expert ser- 
vice but held responsible to the elec- 
torate, is undoubtedly gaining ground 
with thinking people everywhere. 
Some of the reasons in support of 
this proposition were so well stated 
in a recent letter received by the 
editors of Equity from Lieutenant C. 
P. Shaw, of Norfolk, Va., one of our 
Editorial Counselors, that we feel it 
deserves a place in the pages of 
Equity. Lieutenant Shaw wrote as 
follows: 

In connection with governmental 
reform as applied to state govern- 
ments, it has appeared a little strange 
to me that people generally do not 
seem to have appreciated the effect 
on the state legislatures, both as to 
composition and function, of two 
movements which have been going on 
for years past. One of these move- 
ments has culminated in the adoption 
of the amendment to the Federal Con- 
stitution, which provides for the elec- 
tion of U. S. Senators by popular vote. 
With this change in the Federal Con- 
stitution, the last tie that logically 
connected state legislatures with 
questions of national policy has been 
severed, and hereafter such legisla- 
tures in regard to national politics 
should, and naturally in the course 
of time will become as non-partisan 
as city councils. 

The second movement by which leg- 
islatures will be affected Is the grow- 
ing demand for local self-government 
which, until the last few years has 
been made by the cities, but which 



now, since the adoption of the Cali- 
fornia amendment in 1911, has begun 
to be taken up by the counties. 

When thes*e political subdivisions 
shall have been granted the power to 
exercise their natural and inherent 
right of local self-government, and 
through their duly constituted author- 
ities to make all rules and regulations 
for the control of their purely local 
affairs, the legislatures will in a very 
large degree have been relieved of the 
burden of local, special and private 
legislation. And since the legislatures 
will have to consider only general 
laws, affecting the state as a whole, 
there will be neither need nor demand, 
except to gratify personal ambition, 
for local representation in such bodies. 
There will be no log-rolling to do, and 
therefore no necessity for log rollers. 

This state of affairs will greatly 
facilitate the reduction in number of 
representatives in the legislatures and 
will make far more easy the change 
to a small single-chambered legisla- 
ture. 

This type of legislative body then, 
acting in conjunction with an effi- 
cient, permanent, bill-drafting and 
Legislative Reference Bureau will in- 
evitably tend to reduce the number of 
laws, and vastly to improve their 
quality. 



The Story of One Legislature 

The leading editorial in the cur- 
rent issue of the Delaware Referen- 
dum News, entitled "Deliberative 
Bodies," contains a detailed account 
of how the 1915 session of the legis- 
lature of Delaware "deliberated/' 
This is a first-hand study of actual 
facts which will help serious students 
of government to realize the lack of 
deliberation in our representative 
system, as compared with the Initia- 
tive and Referendum processes. But 
it must always be remembered that 
with the I. and R. available for 
emergency, we can proceed safely to 
make our legislative bodies smaller, 
composed of better-paid experts and 
more truly representing the will of 



164 



Equity 



the people. The Delaware story is 
as follows: 

Frequently we hear State Legisla- 
tures referred to as "deliberative 
bodies." This is usually done by op- 
ponents' of the Initiative and Refer- 
endum, and is intended to convey the 
idea that legislatures in general are 
expert in law making, and that the 
people are incompetent and not to be 
trusted in that respect. 

Now let us take the last Legislature 
and the session of the same that came 
to a close a short time ago, and see if 
the facts bear out the idea. 

The legislative session is limited to 
sixty days. The personnel of the 
present Legislature is about the same 
as 1 the average legislature — farmers, 
mechanics and merchants — all good 
average citizens. Of the 35 members 
of the present House of Representa- 
tives, 31 are new members. They 
never had any experience in legisla- 
tion. This leaves four members' who 
had been in the Legislature before, 
and only one of them was in the pre- 
ceding Legislature. No one will dis- 
pute that it takes about half of the 
sixty days' for the new members to 
learn anything about their new duties: 
the very serious duty of making laws 
for a sovereign state. It must not be 
forgotten that these men, with a few 
exceptions', must give some time to 
their own business. All this consider- 
ed, we don't think we have exagger- 
ated when we say that one-half of the 
session is" over by the time the new 
members are familiar with their legis- 
lative duties, which includes, in addi- 
tion to their regular legislative work, 
a membership of from four to seven 
committees. 

It takes about one-half of the time 
to organize and to hear delegations. It 
is a lonely day at Dover during the 
session when there is not one or more 
delegations to be heard. Another 
thing to consider is the fact that the 
Legislature is in session only a few 
hours' each day. The time is taken 
up by the daily round trip on the train 
to and from Dover, only a very few 
of the members remaining over in 
Dover. 

Now we have got down to 30 days 
to "deliberate" on the 352 House bills, 



190 Senate bills and 12 joint resolu- 
tions, making a total of 554 introduced 
at the last session. 

We have 30 days of the session left 
to consider 554 bills, nearly 20 a day. 
New just imagine a body of men in 
session only a few hours a day giving 
any degree of intelligent considera- 
tion to an average of nearly 20 bills 
a day. "Deliberation" is out of the 
question. To "deliberate" means to 
ponder, to think, to weigh, to consider. 
Even if the entire 60 days could be 
given up to "deliberate" on bills it 
would be nearly 10 "deliberates" a 
day, absolutely a physical impossibil- 
ity. 

This is not to be considered a criti- 
cism of the members of the Legisla- 
ture. It is not the individual that is 
at fault, but the system. The same 
condition prevails in other States, 
most of them probably a little worse 
than Delaware. In larger States a 
great many more bills are introduced, 
some of them run into the thousands. 
All newspaper readers are familiar 
with the stories told occasionally 
about the end of the session of some 
Legislatures, how rules are suspend- 
ed and bills passed by title; a little 
later by number, and in the last mad 
rush, in bunches by number only. And 
there are opponents of popular gov- 
ernment who have the effrontery to 
call this "deliberative legislation." 



A TYPICAL LEGISLATURE 



Ex-Governor Hodges of Kansas Ex- 
poses the Inefficient Law Machin- 
ery of His State 

Kansas is a state in which general 
intelligence averages high, and illit- 
eracy runs low. It is a state peopled 
by the descendants of early settlers 
who had convictions and courage. It 
is a prohibition state, and one in 
which wealth and education are dis- 
tributed perhaps better than in any 
other state. So what is said below 
by an ex-governor of Kansas about 
the legislature of that state must not 



Editorial 



165 



be construed as a criticism of that 
excellent state, but of the legislative 
system which is established in all our 
states. 

In the current (June 12) issue of 
the Saturday Evening Post, Ex-gover- 
nor Geo. H. Hodges has an illiumi- 
nating article on "Common Sense for 
Commonwealths," in which he de- 
scribes what he calls "bull-in-the- 
china-shop lawmaking." Here are a 
few of his paragraphs: 

The Speaker announced "A bulk roll 
call and a bulk reading of bills;" and, 
calling- a dozen owners of basso voices 
to the stand, each member was given 
a bill that carried an appropriation 
for some state institution or state de- 
partment. "Is everyone ready?" ask- 
ed the Speaker. A dozen members, 
with a dozen bills, answered: 'Aye. 
aye, sir!" "One for the money, two 
for the show, three to make ready — 
and four, they go!" shouted the pre- 
siding officer. 

And the reading members went. 
They sang and mumbled and shouted 
the words on the pages of the type- 
written bills — each reading from a dif- 
ferent bill, with separate provisions. 
"Louder!" shouted the members. 
"Louder! Louder!" chorused the gal- 
lery visitors, who saw a moment of 
revelry in an otherwise uneventful 
day. 

While the bills were being read 
members pounded on their desks, and 
the reading ended in an uproar in 
which the members, clerks and visi- 
tors participated. The roll was called 
and a deliberative body of lawmakers 
placed its official approval on meas- 
ures that called for the expenditure of 
one and a third million dollars, ap- 
propriated in bulk form, in a dura- 
tion of possibly ten minutes of time. 

Making laws is a serious undertak- 
ing and making appropriations is a 
vital part of the state's business. The 
one hundred and twenty-five members 
of the lower branch of the Kansas 
Legislature seemed to think that ap- 
propriating a vast sum of money — 
by a mass meeting as it were — was 
only a vacational recreation; while at 
other times they discuss with owl-like 



wisdom for an hour or more the best 
method of shortening hatpins! 
* * * 

The new member is generally used 
by the crafty politician, or his exag- 
gerated ego leads him to believe that 
the multiplicity of bills he introduces 
is an evidence of his usefulness as a 
member. 

The assembly is distasteful to him. 
He stands round during the entire 
session, almost in his own way, and 
goes back to the mill on the adjourn- 
ment of the session with but scant 
knowledge of the things that have 
transpired. Yet our legislative sys- 
tem is so faulty, and our legislators 
generally so devoid of serious purpose, 
that members who cannot, in many 
cases, interpret laws after they have 
assisted in their passage will add 
thirty thousand pages to the already 
overpaged statutes of these United 
States this year. 

It is a safe conjecture that fifteen 
thousand of those pages are repeals 
or amendments of statutes passed 
during the last four years. One-half 
of the time of the member who has 
served two sessions is occupied in un- 
doing what he had previously helped 
to do. This defect in our legislative 
method is chargeable to haste in orig- 
inal draftings of bills or an utter lack 
of knowledge of the subject matter by 
the lawmakers. 

Kansas legislators are paid for 
fifty days; and if their work is not 
done then, additional time served 
must be for nothing. 

When pay-day time is past the 
House member particularly hears the 
call of spring, and there is a general 
wish to clean up legislation. Half- 
matured, ill-digested laws are passed. 
Monstrosities are read into the statute 
books — meaningless, ambiguous and 
often vicious — as was evidenced by a 
hastily passed amendment to the Pure 
Food and Drug Act, which uninten- 
tionally removed the restrictions im- 
posed by city ordinance on the sale of 
cocaine and morphine. Had the case 
in point been urged, there would have 
been no restrictions on the sale of 
those drugs during the past two years. 

In the multiplicity of bills* introduc- 
ed and passed, the Kansas session just 



166 



Equity 



closed established a new record. There 
were nineteen hundred and forty bills 
introduced and only one bill of mom- 
ent passed in the first forty days of 
the session — though there was a total 
of three hundred and seventy-eight 
laws passed altogether; about three 
hundred laws were passed during the 
last twenty days of the session. 

It is utterly impossible for human 
beings even to read this mass of mat- 
ter in the closing days of the session — 
much less to understand, digest or 
assimilate it. But this mass of three 
hundred and seventy-eight written 
rules is to be added to an already 
overcorpulent set of Kansas statutes, 
to guide, harass or embarrass — for the 
next two years at least — our seventeen 
hundred thousand Kansans. 

It is in the closing or rush days 
that the meddlesome joker is inserted 
— the innocent-looking anaesthetic the 
lobby has injected into the vitals of 
some publicly demanded wholesome 
measure, which puts the aforesaid 
publicly pledged measure in cold 
storage until the next session of the 
legislature). The individual members in 
these trying hours are interested only 
in their own special bill — the little 
measure they set incubating during 
their campaign, which has only a local 
application — and attempt to carry out 
some personal pledge. They have no 
time to amputate or to assist in a 
surgical operation that would relieve 
some needed corrective measure of 
the strangle hold the interests have 
fastened on it. 

In the closing hours personal- 
interest measures take precedence 
rather than the vital measures for 
which there may be an insistent pub- 
lic demand. The weighty bills of 
merit slide to the bottom of the calen- 
dar and die in an adjournment. 



Instead of diminishing the evils of 
legislative activity by preventing 
their frequent convention, would it 
not be wiser to commit the lawmaking 
power to a limited number of sane, 
conservative, responsible, educated 
men? Representative government will 
the more surely endure as it rests on 
a foundation of intellectuality. So 
long as we continue to choose our 



lawmakers from the highways and by- 
ways, we must expect the efforts of 
these lawmakers to be on a par with 
their various walks of life. It is funda- 
mental that you cannot make a gov- 
ernment more efficient, more business- 
like, than the machinery which oper- 
ates it. 

A glance at the titles of the bills 
introduced in various legislatures dur- 
ing the past session gives a tem- 
peramental index of some of our law- 
makers. A bill prohibiting a woman 
under forty-five from using face pow- 
der, rouge, perfume, false hair, and 
so on, for the purpose of creating a 
false impression, was introduced into 
the Kansas Legislature; and another, 
by a city legislator who had moved 
into town from the country, compell- 
ing chickens to retire between six and 
seven o'clock. 

Other freak measures were intro- 
duced. To limit the size of fishhooks 
and bird cages; to limit the number of 
fishhooks you may use on a single 
line; to prohibit the eating of snakes 
in public, and pie-eating contests; to 
prevent gossip; to punish by penal 
servitude all persons swearing in 
towns; to make it a jail offense for 
a man who has taken a drink of 
liquor to drive any vehicle other than 
a wheelbarrow or a baby buggy. 
* * * 

A large and constantly increasing 
number of people are convinced that 
civilization has outgrown our present 
form of state government, and that 
the instrumentalities for legislation 
provided in our state constitutions 
have become antiquated and in- 
efficient. No reason exists for a dual 
legislative system. The veneration 
with which this ancient system is re- 
garded in some places is no reason 
why we should cling to it in carrying 
on the all-important affairs of state. 
In every other activity of life we are 
discarding old traditions and anti- 
quated methods for newer, more effi- 
cient and more economical methods. 
* * * 

An ideal state government and a 
model legislative plan articulating 
therewith can be had by electing the 
Governor, Auditor and Secretary of 
State as the only elective state of- 



Editorial 



167 



flcials, and for a period of four years. 

Elect two members of the legisla- 
ture from each of the congressional 
districts — which would make sixteen 
members in Kansas — on a nonpartisan 
ticket, with terms of office of four 
years each, and with a provision for 
expiration of terms in rotation, in 
order to secure stability and exper- 
ience. 

Pay these legislators a good salary. 
Permit the Governor, without limita- 
tions, to choose his attorney-general, 
but have all other state officers chosen 
by the Executive from the members 
of the legislature elect — insurance 
commissioner, labor commissioner, 
state treasurer, superintendent of pub- 
lic instruction, and so on. These men, 
after familiarizing themselves with 
the duties of their offices, can far more 
intelligently legislate for the needs of 
their respective departments than the 
ordinary inexperienced legislator. 

If a law needed amending, or a new 
enactment was under consideration, 
this legislature, which would soon be- 
come a body of iexpert lawmakers, 
could call in experienced men of all 
lines of business for counsel and ad- 
vice; and, being in session whenever 
necessary and lawmaking being their 
business, they would give ample time 
to the study of all enactments, and 
their efforts would be sane, under- 
standable, and would need no expert 
interpretation. 

The form would be the product of a 
man skilled in legal procedure, who 
knows how to draft an enactment 
that would stand the test of the courts 
if need be and, at the same time, 
meet the demand the occasion requir- 
ed. 

The Governor should be the presid- 
ing officer, without veto power, of this 
legislature. The office of lieutenant 
governor should be abolished. This 
would be simplified state government. 

There will be savage criticism that 
this is undemocratic. I would answer 
that this form of government would 
be more responsive to the will of the 
people, and, therefore, more demo- 
cratic. We must cease confounding 
numbers with democracy. "The pre- 
vailing misconception of /democracy 
makes it every man's business to con- 



cern himself with matters that, as a 
rule, he knows little about." 
* * * 

The last legislature cost Kansas a 
hundred thousand dollars and its ef- 
forts were bungling, crude, faulty and 
ill digested. One hundred thousand 
dollars would have paid the salaries 
of sixteen skilled men for two years 
as combined legislators and state of- 
ficials. 



CONSTITUTIONAL GROWTH 



Need for a More Democratic Proce- 
dure of Amending the Federal 
Constitution. 



By Seba Eldridge, Organizer for the 
Committee on the Federal Consti- 
tution, 67 Schermerhorn St., Brook- 
lyn, N. Y.* 

The Committee on the Federal Con- 
stitution has been formed to advo- 
cate a more democratic procedure of 
amending our national constitution. 
The movement is inspired by the be- 
lief that the people of the United 
States have not at the present time 
control over their fundamental law, 
save in a minor degree, and that, as 
a consequence, our institutions do not 
reflect the will of the people but 
forces that are opposed to their true 
interest. 

In taking this position, the Com- 
mittee is not unmindful of the fact 
that two amendments to the consti- 
tution have recently been adopted, 
and that this has tended to show that 
amendments can be secured when 
there is a general demand for them. 
The Committee believes, notwith- 
standing, that the history of those 
very amendments furnishes a power- 
ful argument for its position. 

Eighteen years elapsed after the 
income-tax law was declared uncon- 
stitutional, before the amendment 
specifically authorizing an income tax 



168 



Equity 



was adopted. The law was passed 
in response to an overwhelming sen- 
timent on the part of the country in 
favor of shifting the incidence of 
taxation from the agricultural classes 
to the manufacturing and commercial 
classes who were thought better able 
to bear it. The income tax was to 
provide the revenue which would be 
forfeited under the new tariff rates 
that were demanded. Invalidation of 
the income-tax law not only made this 
transfer of taxation burdens impos- 
sible, but, by prescribing the fiscal 
policy of the country, affected vitally 
and permanently the country's in- 
dustrial development. The result is, 
we have to-day an essentially different 
organization of industry from what 
we would have, had the income-tax 
law stood. We are less an agricul- 
tural and more a manufacturing na- 
tion because of that decision and the 
difficulty of reversing it. This may 
be well, but it was not of our choos- 
ing. Prof. Seligman has demon- 
strated pretty conclusively that the 
term "direct taxes" around which the 
controversy over the law centered was 
not intended by the framers of the 
constitution to prohibit the appor- 
tionment of taxes according to 
wealth as well as according to pop- 
ulation. The word "direct" was in- 
troduced to settle the vexed question 
of representation and not any dispute 
over taxation. Is it not, then, the 
height of unreason, considering the 
history of this provision and the fact 
that the constitution of which it was 
part was drafted before there were 
any railroads or any factory system, 
that it should through an erroneous 
interpretation be permitted to modify 
the whole course of our industrial 
development? In our opinion, it can 
scarcely be maintained that features 
of a constitutional system which per- 



mit such defeats of popular purpose 
are to be seriously supported by 
advocates of democratic government. 
Not only must the amending procedure 
of the constitution be democratized, 
our conception of the constitution 
as an instrument of self-government 
must be modified as well. It must 
come to be regarded less as a master 
to be venerated and obeyed, and more 
as a servant to be made and kept 
loyal and efficient. 

The adpotion of the amendment for 
the popular election of senators is no 
better proof of a good amending pro- 
cedure. This amendment was adopt- 
ed, it is true, in response to a general 
demand therefor, but it was not 
adopted until long after sentiment was 
practically united in its favor and the 
states had found extra-legal means 
of accomplishing the same purpose. 
So, the adoption of this amendment 
was little more than the formal rati- 
fication of an irregular procedure of 
electing United States senators by 
popular vote established in default of 
a regular constitutional procedure. 
It will be said that both these amend- 
ments could have been secured earlier 
had there been a sufficiently general 
demand for them. This may be true, 
but in making the claim no more is 
really said than that there must, un- 
der the present amending procedure 
of the constitution, be an almost 
unanimous demand for constitutional 
changes before they can be effected. 
When one more than one-third of the 
members of Congress can prevent the 
proposal of amendments, and one 
more than one-fourth of the states 
can prevent the ratification of amend- 
ments that may be proposed, an 
obstructive minority rule in this mat- 
ter is the fact, and not a positive 
majority rule. How greatly is the 
possibility of change diminished when 



Editorial 



169 



the jurisdiction of Congress or of the 
states is in question, and these con- 
stitutional agencies must pass on 
propositions to limit or restrict 
their functions! Such amendments 
are almost surely doomed to defeat at 
the outset. That this latter is far 
from being an academic question is 
amply attested by the discernment of 
a "twilight zone" between state and 
federal jurisdictions, the movement 
for uniform state legislation, and 
other confessions of weakness in our 
present system. 

If it is with great difficulty that 
particular amendments to the consti- 
tution are secured, and especially 
amendments redefining the relations 
of national and state governments or 
altering the position of Congress or 
of the state legislatures, no way at all 
could be devised of amending the con- 
stitution as a whole or considerable 
sections of it, should that be found 
necessary. The convention plan in 
Article V is unworkable. Two-thirds 
of the State legislatures would never 
call for a convention in the identical 
terms that would be required for ef- 
fective action; and particularly would 
they not call for a convention to pro- 
pose a general revision of the consti- 
tution. Apart from the fact that they 
would be too interested a party to 
favor a general revision, it could 
hardly be expected that, independent- 
ly of each other, they should one by 
one, up to two-thirds their number, 
agree on a convention for general re- 
vision. It is too large a proportion of 
so great a number of independent 
bodies to require for the initiation of 
amendments wherein their own status 
would be reviewed and might be 
altered. It would be a bold Congress 
that would propose a general revis- 
ion, or even a revision of single arti- 
cles of the constitution. Should any 
Congress be disposed to do so, it 



would, like the state legislatures, be 
too interested a party to propose an 
impartial revision, particularly where 
its own powers were concerned. It is 
not properly constituted in respect of 
personnel, if for no other reason, to 
exercise such a function. 

Nor is the question of general re- 
vision an academic one. From the 
point of view of our present-day con- 
ception of government, or the point 
of view of the actual public opinion 
of the time, there is the greatest need 
for a general revision of the consti- 
tution, although it has not as yet 
been generally recognized. The doc- 
trines of property rights and of states' 
rights underlie the entire constitution, 
permeate it, tie it together, make of 
it an organic whole. All fair-minded 
students of politics, whatever their 
political and economic opinions, would 
admit, we believe, that these doctrines 
would be revised were we now to draft 
a constitution. The far-reaching effects 
of such a revision on social and politi- 
cal development would likewise be 
admitted. Yet under our present 
amending procedure genuine revision 
of these doctrines cannot be attempt- 
ed. We are confined instead to a 
guerilla warfare for or against them, 
as seems to isolated individuals or 
groups to be desirable. Something 
like this must have been in the mind 
of Prof. Goodnow when he wrote: 

"Acts of Congress and of state legis- 
latures are declared to be unconstitu- 
tional because they can- 
not be made to conform to a concep- 
tion of the organization and powers 
of government which we have inherit- 
ed from the 18th century 

There are few persons having the 
welfare of this country really at 
heart, or not blinded by prejudice or 
class interest, who will assert that the 
conditions of the American people are 
so peculiar that we should close for 
them the avenues open to other peo- 



170 



Equity 



pies through which orderly and pro- 
gressive political development in ac- 
cordance with changing economic and 
social conditions may proceed. Few 
can refrain from asking the question 
why Americans alone, of all people, 
should be denied the possibility of 
political and social change." 

At the time this was written Prof. 
Goodnow relied upon, or rather, hoped 
for, a change in the attitude of the 
Supreme Court as a solution of the 
difficulty which he saw. But the 
manner of appointing the justices of 
the Supreme Court, and the absence 
of any electoral control over the 
Court or its decisions, would seem to 
make this an uncertain dependence at 
best. Appointed by the President to 
serve for life, or until retired, if they 
request it, at the age of seventy 
years, the members of the Court are 
older men on the average than is the 
President, and are likely to be more 
conservative in viewpoint. They are 
therefore likely to be more conserva- 
tive than the constituency which elects 
the President. It is beside the point 
to consider whether this be well or ill. 
The point is that the rule of the Court 
can scarcely be all that the people 
desire. Whether this argument be 
sound or fanciful, it is coming more 
and more to be believed that we can- 
not look to the Supreme Court for 
authority to deal with the problems 
growing out of our social and econo- 
mic development. Says Dr. Blaine 
F. Moore in his monograph ''The 
Supreme Court and Unconstitutional 
Legislation": 

"If we may Judge from the decisions 
based on the due process clause in the 
14th amendment and applying to the 
states, the Court has it in its power 
to make the similar clause in the 5th 
amendment cover practically all fed- 
eral legislation dealing with new 
problems concerning which there are 
few or no precedents. If the Court 
does make this entirely possible ex- 



tension of its power, then the legisla- 
tion dealing with the more recent 
and pressing questions is under the 
control of the popularly inaccessible 

justices of the Supreme Court 

It is believed by many that the Uni- 
ted States is now facing another real 
crisis because of the unsatisfactory 
character of present social and indus- 
trial conditions. In the light of a 
knowledge of the achievements of the 
Supreme Court in the past, is the na- 
tion justified in believing that that 
tribunal will wisely exercise this large 
control over national legislation af- 
fecting present vital problems which 
it may, and possibly will, exercise be- 
cause of its power, readily used in re- 
cent times, to nullify statutes under 
elastic clauses of the constitution?" 

This is not denying that the atti- 
tude of the Supreme Court will not 
change with changing conditions; it 
is only claiming that the Court has 
been in the past, and will probably be 
in the future, obstructive of efforts 
at social and economic readjustment. 

In view of the difficulty, the all- 
but-impossibility of amending the 
constitution, and of the absence of 
electoral control over the Supreme 
Court, it is hardly going too far to say 
that we are living under a virtual 
despotism, a despotism that is often 
benevolent, it is true, but a despotism 
none the less. We are, indeed, in a 
worse position in one sense than the 
people of a monarchy. For our sov- 
ereign, or one of our sovereigns, is the 
letter of a document that was drafted 
in a time as far removed as possible 
from the life and thought of our own 
time, much further removed, it is cer- 
tain, than is any monarch of to-day 
from his people. In saying this we are 
not wanting in respect for and loyalty 
to the constitution or the Supreme 
Court. We are only insisting that 
they must be our servants, not our 
masters, that ultimate political power 
must be lodged with the people, not 



Editorial 



171 



with court or constitution, that these 
instruments of government must be 
made instruments of ^//-government 
if they are permanently to endure. 

The platform of the Committee on 
the Federal Constitution contains 
these words: 

"Control of the organic law by the 
people means the power to revise it in 
any way and to any extent they de- 
sire. It means the power to amend the 
written constitution as Judicially in- 
terpreted, in part or in whole, as the 
people may determine. This will re- 
quire a procedure of revision that will 
provide for the initiation and adoption 
of particular amendments as they 
may be required, without more delay 
than that needed for wise delibera- 
tion; and, when necessary, for recast- 
ing- the constitution as a whole. For 
the people to have effective control 
over the machinery of government, at 
least one process of revising the con- 
stitution must be independent, so far 
as the proposal and ratification of 
amendments are concerned, of any or- 
gan or organs of government already 
constituted." 

To establish such a procedure the 
Committee favors (1) a reduction of 
the vote by which Congress may pro- 
pose amendments from two-thirds to 
a majority, and of the proportion of 
states required for ratification of 
amendments so proposed from three- 
fourths to two-thirds; and (2) sub- 
stitution for the present (unworkable) 
method of calling constitutional con- 
ventions, the submission to the voters 
at every fifth presidential election and 
at such other presidential elections 
as a majority of Congress or a 
majority of the states might deter- 
mine, of the question of holding a 
convention to propose amendments to 
the constitution, with a majority vote 
requisite to affirmative action, amend- 
ments so proposed to be submitted to 
the voters at the presidential election 
following the convention, with a two- 
thirds vote requisite to ratification. 



The first change proposed would 
"provide for the initiation and adop- 
tion of particular amendments as they 
may be required, without more delay 
than that needed for wise delibera- 
tion". In the Committee's opinion a 
majority of Congress, representing 
presumably the wishes of a majority 
of the country, is a sufficiently large 
vote for the proposal of amendments, 
and two-thirds of the state legisla- 
tures, representing presumably the 
wishes of two-thirds of the states of 
the Union, is a sufficiently large vote 
for the ratification of amendments so 
proposed. The interval between pro- 
posal by Congress and ratification 
by the required number of states 
should furnish enough time for a 
careful review of the action of 
Congress. 

The second change proposed would 
provide, "when necessary, for recast- 
ing the constitution as a whole." The 
same proportions hold for votes for 
initiation and adoption as in the first 
proposal, with the difference that in 
the convention plan initiation and 
adoption are by popular vote. The 
holding of a convention or the ac- 
ceptance of a convention's proposals 
would never be compulsory under this 
plan, but only optional. The people 
themselves would decide whether the 
basic law of the land needed amend- 
ment to the extent that a convention 
for the purpose was desirable, and, 
if called, they would further have the 
power of ratifying or rejecting amend- 
ments proposed by the convention. 
When it was decided to call a conven- 
tion to amend the constitution there 
would be ample time for the selection 
of delegates and the suggestion of 
amendments before the convention 
met, and for the discussion of amend- 
ments proposed by the convention, 
before these were submitted to the 



172 



Equity 



voters for action. There would then 
be a period of sixteen years before 
the question of calling another con- 
vention was submitted to the people, 
unless a majority of Congress or a 
majority of the state legislatures 
voted to submit the question before 
the regular time. In this time the 
working of the new amendments 
would be tested and the need for 
further constitutional changes point- 
ed out, if there was such. 

The adoption of this program would 
provide a rational, democratic proce- 
dure of amending the federal consti- 
tution that should make it a more 
efficient instrument of progress than 
it has been in the past. It would, 
indeed, mean nothing less than setting 
free the political energies of a great 
nation, the winning of a freedom the 
far-reaching and beneficent effects of 
which could hardly be overestimated. 
The Committee on the Federal Con- 
stitution believes, therefore, that its 
proposals should command the sup- 
port of all those who believe in 
democratic government, whatever 
their political or economic views. 

*The Organization Committee of 
the Committee is as follows: 

John B. Andrews, New York; Henry 
A. Atkinson, Boston; Kate Barnard, 
Oklahoma City, Okla.; Samuel Z. Bat- 
ten, Philadelphia; Charles A. Beard, 
New York; George Burnham, Jr., Phil- 
adelphia; W. E. Chancellor, Wooster, 
Ohio; F. Stuart Chap in, Northampton, 
Mass.; W. T. Cross, Chicago; Albert 
DeSilver, Brooklyn, N Y.; Seba Eld- 
ridge, Brooklyn, N. Y.; Edward A. 
Fitzpatrick, Madison, Wis.; H. S. Gil- 
bertson, New York; Arnold B. Hall, 
Madison, Wis.; Albert Bushnell Hart, 
Cambridge, Mass.; W. O. Hart, New 
Orleans; John Haynes Holmes, New 
York; Charles H. Ingersoll, New 
York; James Jenkins, Jr., Brooklyn, 
N. Y. ; Alexander Johnson, Vineland, N. 
J.; Stiles P. Jones, Minneapolis; Mrs. 
Florence Kelley, New York; John A. 
Lapp, Indianapolis; Samuel McCune 



Lindsay, New York; Owen R. Lovejoy, 
New York; Charles McCarthy, Madi- 
son, Wis.; A. J. McKelway, Washing- 
ton, D. C. ; Charles S. MacFarland, 
New York; Blaine F. Moore, Washing- 
ton, D. C; Maurice Parmelee, New 
York; Amos R. E. Pinchot, New York; 
Charles A. Prosser, New York; Edward 
A. Ross, Madison, Wis.; J. Salwyn 
Schapiro, New York; J. E. Spingarn, 
New York; Charles Stelzle, Maple- 
wood, N. J.; Lyman Beecher Stowe, 
New York; Frank H. Streightoff, 
Greencastle, Ind. ; Clinton Rogers 
Woodruff, Philadelphia; Allyn A. 
Young, Ithaca, N. Y.; Charles Zueblin, 
Boston. 



Dangerous National Neighbors 

If permitted, militarists will always 
expect to put into practice the well 
known Napoleonic plan of striking 
quickly before the enemy is ready. 
This plan has lead to more military 
successes than any other one plan. 
This was Germany's plan last Aug- 
ust, but it did not work as brilliantly 
as usual, chiefly on account of the 
unexpected resistance of Belgium. 

All of the present peace plans that 
seem to have any promise of success 
in them, including Mr. Bryan's fam- 
ous peace treaties, contemplate a 
program of delay and inquiry, which 
is the very opposite of the sudden at- 
tack military plan. The favor with 
which the latter plan is regarded by 
military men stands in the way of 
the delay and inquiry peace plan. 
The readiness with which Germany 
regarded a treaty concerning the neu- 
trality of Belgium as "a scrap of 
paper" when it stood in the way of 
Germany's military plans, suggests 
that a military nation would so re- 
gard a peace treaty enjoining delay 
and inquiry, if such a treaty should 
be considered as standing in the way 
of military necessity. 

Hence, it is doubtful if any peace 
policy will ever be successful unless 
it shall include the stripping of the 



Editorial 



173 



power to make a sudden military on- 
slaught upon a neighbor from every 
signatory nation. In a civilized com- 
munity, the storing up of explosives 
and other instruments of aggression 
by any citizen would be considered a 
threat to his neighbors, who would 
regard him as a dangerous neighbor. 
The neighbors would not store up ex- 
plosives, etc., in their own premises 
for defence, thus making a destruc- 
tive contest all the more probable 
and all the more destructive to life 
and property. 

They would, properly, complain to 
the authorities, who would remove 
the dangerous materials from the 
threatening neighbor's premises. This 
would make sudden onslaught on the 
part of the militarist impossible. And 
any difficulties that might arise be- 
tween the militarist and his neigh- 
bors would be taken to court and 
settled justly and without destruction 
of life and property. 

International peace can never be 
secure until this principle can be ap- 
plied to nations. This cannot be done 
until some authority is created, able 
to inspect the military preparedness 
of all the constituent nations, and 
having authority and power to reduce 
such preparedness to a point that no 
constituent nation would be able to 
make the Napoleonic sudden on- 
slaught upon a neighbor. 

An objector will immediately say 
that such reduction of immediately 
available military preparedness would 
expose every nation in the combina- 
tion to Napoleonic attacks from the 
outside. Not so. The combination 
must have a military and naval 
equipment right up to the last mom- 
ent of preparedness and efficiency, 
and stronger than any other equip- 
ment in the world for both offence 
and defence, under the control of the 



representative body of the constit- 
uent nations. 

There can be no order without gov- 
ernment. The reason that there is 
international anarchy now is because 
there is no international government. 
They may talk for another century 
or two about international courts, 
leagues of peace, arbitration, etc., 
but all these will fail, as they always 
have failed, when there is a severe 
stress. The only thing that will ever 
preserve international peace is an in- 
ternational government, planned some- 
what after our interstate govern- 
ment, with the supreme authority 
and force lodged in a central body 
like our Congress, to be made up of 
representatives from all the constit- 
uent nations. This body, with its 
military arm, can make sudden at- 
tack by any nation in the combina- 
tion impossible. And, in the interest 
of peace and protection, it would in- 
sist on the privilege of inspecting 
the military preparedness of any 
nation outside of the combination, 
for it would have the power to do so, 
and it could insist upon removing, if 
necessary, the danger of sudden at- 
tack. Suppose Russia was outside. 
The intelligence and interest of the 
world would demand its reducing its 
armaments to within the danger 
limit. Such an international govern- 
ment, if it would not embrace the 
entire world, must be of sufficient 
strength to control the entire world. 

At a notable peace congress which 
met in Independence Hall, Philadel- 
phia, June 17th, a league was formed 
to enforce international peace. The 
pacifists take exception to the word 
"enforce." Military matters can be 
handled in no other way. Militarists 
regard no influence except force. The 
only way to control national prepar- 
ation for war, is to create a better 
and stronger international prepar- 



174 Equity 

ation to keep the peace. This power cept 



can and should superintend and con- 
trol the war preparations of all na- 
tions, both within and without the 
combination, in the interest of world 
peace. Cannon know no control ex- 



by greater cannon. World 
peace can never be secured except 
by means of a military power strong- 
er than any power likely to disturb 
the peace. 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department. 

Continuing the Direct Legislation Record, which was the first publication devoted to the Initiative 
and Referendum. It was started in New Jersey, in 1893, by J. W. Sullivan, as the organ for the 
National Direct Legislation League and various State Leagues. It was continued from 1894 to 
1904 by Mr. Eltweed Pomeroy and revived and included in Equity Series in 1906. 

Also continuing the Referendum News, formerly published in Washington, D. C, by Mr. Geo. 
H. Shibley, and consolidated with Equity Series early in 1907. 



TAKING PART IN THE GAME 

A Significant Set of Facts About the 
Proportion of Voters Active in 
Different States. 

"It is a favorite indoor sport,' 1 
writes James A. Haight in the 
Seattle Municipal News, "to lament 
the indifference of the American 
voter to his public duties. He dodges 
service on juries. He forgets to 
vote. He abhors the caucus. There 
is no political health in him. Scold- 
ing doesn't reach him. Entreaties 
find him deaf. Abuse makes him 
laugh. When Smith lambastes Brown 
for being a free trade Democrat, and 
Brown ridicules Jones for being a 
freak Progressive and Jones de- 
nounces Smith for being a reaction- 
ary Republican, the voter wearily 
turns away to the latest baseball 
dope and the fluctuations in stocks 
and wheat. Is he an incorrigible of- 
fender beyond redemption? Is his 
malady chronic and without cure? 
Must the political doctors and mor- 
alists give him up? Is there no 
hope? How bad is the disease?" 

Having asked these questions, Mr. 
Haight proceeds to answer by ask- 
ing several more questions containing 
some highly significant facts about 



voting in this country. Why, he 
wants to know, do only 38.4 of the 
voters in Vermont vote while in 
Oregon 76.2 of the electorate go to 
the polls, on the average? Can there 
be any connection between this in- 
difference of Vermont's voters rela- 
tively to Oregon voters and the fact 
that the Oregon voters have the 
Initiative and Referendum and the 
Green Mountain boys have not? Is 
it possible that the opportunity to 
initiate legislation or to ratify or to 
annul laws adopted by the legislature 
is an incentive to voting? 

Wyoming has neither Initiative nor 
Referendum and polls 61.5 per cent, 
of its voters. South Dakota has 
both Initiative and Referendum and 
80.7 per cent, of it's voters vote. Wis- 
consin is quite "advanced" but not 
enough to have the Initiative or Ref- 
erendum and votes 67.5 per cent, of 
its voters while Ohio having both, 
votes 84.5 per cent, of its voters. 

Apparently the banner State of all 
is Washington with 87.9 per cent, of 
its voters voting and fairly revelling 
in their Initiative and Referendum 
privileges, which seem to give the 
utmost satisfaction to everybody ex- 
cept the last legislature. 

After all isn't it true that to get 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



175 



the voter to vote you must get him 
interested? What will interest him? 
A remarkably able and captivating 
personality, most of all. But such a 
source of interest is hard to get. A 
vital issue will stir the people; but 
as time goes on the issues become 
less vital and more a matter of de- 
tail. An opportunity for the voter 
himself to pass on the policies he 
wants his public servants to carry 
out is such a source of interest. 

People tire of the froth and fal- 
lacies of candidates and of the follies 
and futilities of officials. They pre- 
fer to do their own thinking and to 
give that thinking effect themselves. 
Voting their own convictions into 
laws is what they need and what 
they wish. It is the real exercise of 
the political power they theoretically 
possess. Their ability and their in- 
terest grow by exercise. They thus 
escape the atrophy that comes from 
disuse. 



Mr. Barnes an Anarchist 

"I do not believe in majority rule, 
but am a strong champion of indivd- 
ual liberty." According to a re- 
port in the Knickerbocker Press of 
June 24, these words were spoken by 
Hon. Wm Barnes as Chairman of the 
Committee on Legislative Powers of 
the Constitutional Convention on the 
preceding day during a public hear- 
ing on the Initiative and Referendum, 
after several speakers had been 
heard. This comes dangerously near 
to the belief of anarchists — indeed 
it is the central belief held by the 
upholders of the doctrines of anarchy. 
Can the members of the Republican 
party, in which Mr. Barnes* is a 
leader, endorse such a doctrine? 

Further: 

Mr. Barnes suggested that when 
the voters had exercised their un- 



doubted right to formulate the 
fundamental law by adopting a Con- 
stitution, their power was transferred 
to the officials elected or delegated to 
interpret that document. 

If the rights of the voters to vote 
directly on constitutions and consti- 
tutional amendments were not already 
firmly established, could we expect 
one of Mr. Barnes* type of mind to 
help to establish that right? And is 
not voting directly upon constitutions 
and constitutional amendments a far 
more difficult and responsible task 
than voting directly upon laws? And 
why should the voters transfer their 
power to elected officials unless they 
desire to do so? Should they not 
have an opportunity to say whether 
or not they wish to thus limit 
their powers? All we ask is that 
the voters of New York State 
be given an opportunity to vote on 
a good Initiative and Referendum 
proposition. Has the convention a 
moral right to deny this opportunity 
to the voters? The voters may re- 
member those in the convention who 
deliberately and persistently stand in 
the way of that right. Let us take 
one more quotation from Mr. 
Barnes : 

"There is nothing in the Constitu- 
tion which says the majority must 
rule. "We have established this propo- 
sition in America: That the American 
nation was established on the propo- 
sition of individual liberty, and that 
the people, the Governor, the Presi- 
dent — no matter who he is — can not 
take from me my rights." 

If Mr. Barnes wants to live in civil- 
ized society, he must be satisfied 
with the ''rights" that the law gives 
him. If he is not so satisfied, his 
only recourse js to go into some 
wilderness where there is no law, and 
live according to the ideals of the 
departed Herr Most. We wish to call 
the above to the special attention 
of "Teddy." 



176 



Equity 



Deliberate Legislation Desired 

The following paragraph clipped 
from the Knickerbocker Press for June 
24th, giving a report of the hearing 
before the Committee on Legislative 
Powers, of which the President of 
Cornell University is a prominent 
member: 

Dr. Schurman showed his opposition 
to be based on his belief that the initi- 
ative and referendum put on the elec- 
torate more duties than they can per- 
form. He and most men, he said, have 
not the time to read and consider 
carefully the various propositions that 
would be brought up on a referendum, 
but they have the time to consider 
carefully various men who are offered 
to represent them in just this work 
and so can decide intelligently on the 
ones they believe best able to repre- 
sent their ideas. 

Concerning the opportunity which 
voters have of informing themselves 
concerning the "various men who are 
offered to represent them," the dis- 
tinguished teacher is referred to the 
advocates of the Short Ballot. It is 
as difficult for college presidents and 
professors to "decide intelligently" 
concerning candidates as it is for 
the mass of voters to so decide. So 
the way to lighten the burdens of the 
voters and at the same time secure 
better government is to adopt the 
Short Ballot. 

Dr. Schurman does not seem to 
consider the present burdens placed 
upon legislators. His attention is 
called to an article by an ex-governor 
of Kansas, reviewed in this issue. 
Our present plan of making laws 
places a tremendous burden upon 
lawmakers. In no state or city have 
the Initiative and Referendum placed 
such burdens upon the voters. 

However, what is most needed is 
a complete revision of our system of 
making state laws. Even a trained 
lawmaker could not lead and care- 



fully consider from ten to twenty 
proposed bills every day; much less 
can we reasonably expect a man un- 
trained for lawmaking to do so. Our 
present system produces haste and 
confusion during the final days of 
every session, during which impor- 
tant laws are made under conditions 
which are fatal to good legislation. 

The legislature of a state should 
consist of a small body of men of the 
highest caliber of mind in the state. 
They should compare in quality and 
ability with the members of the high- 
est court in the state, and they 
should be as well paid, and have a 
reasonably long tenure, with eligi- 
bility to indefinite re-election. This 
body should sit every month in the 
year, with possible vacation in mid- 
summer, and while not in session 
they should be engaged in investiga- 
tion into conditions of the state with 
view to future legislation. 

This body would not make many 
laws, but the laws made would be 
worth while. The Swiss national 
lawmaking body makes only about 
a dozen laws per year, and the can- 
tons only about a half dozen each. 
Our states do not need more than 
twenty well made laws per year, on 
an average. They should be made 
by the best constructive abilities in 
the state, and they should not be 
made in haste. Any proposed law 
that should pass the second reading 
of a bods?- such as suggested above 
should then be placed on probation 
for six months, and published in an 
official publication and circulated 
freely to the press of the state, to 
various organizations and to individ- 
ual voters upon request. At the end 
of the six months probation the legis- 
lative body would know the senti- 
ments of the state, any need for 
amendments, etc. 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



177 



A Critic of Equity Answered 

The Phoenix, Arizona, Republican 
takes issue with Equity in connection 
with the admission of the votes of 
women in California, the effect of 
which was nearly to double the num- 
ber of signatures required to com- 
plete initiative or referendum peti- 
tions under the percentage basis. 
The Republican is concerned because 
Equity favors the using of a definite 
number of signatures as a basis, in- 
stead of the percentage plan, and 
says: 

"Equity" is printed in Philadelphia 
whose inhabitants lack the experience 
with the initiative and referendum 
that some of us have had, and our ex- 
perience has taught us that it is al- 
ready too easy to place initiative and 
referred measures before the voters. 
We are casting about for ways to 
ascertain that there is a stronger 
sentiment behind such measures than 
the constitutional percentages dis- 
close and that that sentiment must 
take the form of a majority affirma- 
tive expression on such measures by 
all who attend the polls where they 
are submitted. But we can have these 
reforms only by amending the con- 
stitution. 

In the words of Shakespeare, it is 
true, "and a pity 'tis 'tis true," that 
the inhabitants of Philadelphia do 
lack experience with the Initiative 
and Referendum; but they certainly 
do not lack experience that proves 
conclusively the need of those pow- 
ers in the hands of the voters. With- 
in this very year this city has seen 
its dearest interests and most im- 
portant projects flouted by a body 
of elected councilmen, acting in 
obedience to machine bosses, and 
totally regardless of the known de- 
sires of the public. 

But it would be hardly reasonable 
to infer, because Equity is published 
in Philadelphia, that its views are 
thus based merely upon the exper- 
ience of that city. Quite the con- 



trary. From its very inception 
Equity has stood as the exponent of 
the whole national movement toward 
popular control of government. Our 
Arizona contemporary says that its 
experience shows that it is already 
too easy to initiate and refer meas- 
ures; but we would respectfully ask, 
why too easy if the object is to cure 
the indifference of the Arizona voters 
about which the Republican com- 
plains? Our friend discloses his dis- 
trust of the voters by suggesting 
that the circulation of initiative or 
referendum petitions be prohibited, 
and that all signatures be affixed in 
designated offices. As well might 
we argue that the expression of 
opinions on any public measure 
should be limited to certain times 
and places. The signing of a refer- 
endum petition is essentially nothing 
more nor less than the expression of 
an opinion concerning a given meas- 
ure except that a record of these 
expressions is thus kept, so that if 
a given number of like opinions are 
disclosed then the question under con- 
sideration must be placed before the 
entire community with full opportun- 
ity for public discussion and the 
supplying of information to every 
voter, after which a majority decis- 
ion must be rendered at the polls 
according to orderly and established 
process. The hope of democracy 
lies in the best possible intelligent 
participation of the individuals liv- 
ing under it. Such participation is 
not to be attained by making the 
method of obtaining popular verdicts 
more difficult. 



As to Abuse of the Referendum 

The state of North Dakota is now 
facing its first experience with the 
Initiative and Referendum. Under 
the amendment adopted at last No- 
vember's election, referendum peti- 



178 



Equity 



tions are now in circulation with the 
object of referring to the voters four- 
teen measures enacted at this year's 
legislative session. The effect of these 
petitions, if signed by 10 percent, of 
the voters, will be to hold up these 
measures until they can be submitted 
to the electorate at the next state 
election in November, 1916. 

Here we have a situation causing 
a great deal of heated controversy 
among the people of North Dakota, 
and which all sincere and faithful 
friends of popular government must 
be prepared to interpret in calm and 
judicial spirit. "Abuse of the Refer- 
endum" is the way in which the 
Grand Forks, N. D., Herald and a 
number of other conservative news- 
papers refer to this first effort to use 
the new instrument. It will be 
worth while to examine in some de- 
tail the criticism offered by these 
papers; and we take as a fair ex- 
ample of many editorials appearing 
in them one from the May first issue 
of the Grand Forks Herald. Speaking 
of the probability that a sufficient 
number of signatures would be ob- 
tained for these referendum peti- 
tions, the Herald said: "The result 
will be that without anything re- 
sembling popular demand, through 
the activity of a few individuals, 
and, probably, the expenditure of a 
small sum of money, the action of 
the general assembly of the state on 
fourteen somewhat important legis- 
lative measures will be rendered 
nugatory until after the general elec- 
tion of 1916." 

The Herald goes on to speak in 
some detail of the several bills thus 
assailed. They are as follows: 

1 — H. B. No. 492 repealing the one- 
eighth mill levy for terminal elevators 
and appropriating $2,000 to be used by 
the railroad commissioners to conduct 
an investigation of the terminal eleva- 
tor proposition. 



2 — S. B. No. 143 appropriating $250,- 
000 to be expended at the hospital 
for the insane at Jamestown for new 
buildings. 

3 — H. B. No. 508 appropriating $29,- 
239.86 to make up the shortage in 
the capitol maintenance account. 

4 — H. B. No. 507 appropriating $24.- 
637.04 to make up the shortage in the 
public printing account. 

5 — H. B. No. 506 appropriating 
$6,066.61 to make up the shortage in 
the public examiner's fund. 

6 — S. B. No. 150 appropriating $48,- 
000 to make up the shortage in the 
penitentiary accounts. 

7 — S. B. No. 194, appropriating $60,- 
000 to promote immigration and for 
creating an immigration board. 

8 — H. B. No. 361, providing for a 
board of regents to take over all the 
state institutions of learning. 

9 — S. B. No. 156, appropriating $15,- 
000 for the governor to employ ac- 
countant for checking over public ac- 
counts. 

10— H. B. No. 216 defining the du- 
ties and the authorities of the emer- 
gency commission. 

11 — S. B. No. 279 seeking to extend 
the term of office of the board of con- 
trol from two to six years. 

12 — 9. B. No. 152 making the board 
of control the trustees of public pro- 
perty, including the capitol and the 
state electric car lines. 

13 — H. B. No. 356 providing means 
whereby the regulations and the con- 
trol of water works, light and gas 
plants are put under the control and 
jurisdiction of a railroad commission. 

14 — S. B. No. 139 giving the railroad 
commission power over telephone com- 
panies. 

The Herald says that it is difficult 
to see where this sort of thing will 
end, and recalls the experience of 
Oregon with her referendum law 
during the first year of its existence, 
when the appropriations for all the 
educational institutions were held up 
for more than a year. ''When the 
people got a chance to vote," says 
the Herald, "they approved the bills 
and rebuked those who had obstruct- 
ed them. Oregon has had no similar 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



179 



experience since then, and the state 
seems to have come to a realization 
of the fact that the referendum is not 
to be used as a plaything, nor as a 
means of gratifying the spite of dis- 
gruntled politicians. North Dakota 
has not learned this lesson from the 
experience of her neighbor. She may 
learn it from her own. If, however, 
a factious minority continues to ob- 
struct the progress of the state, it 
will be necessary to take steps to de- 
prive that minority of its too liberal 
allowance of power." 

"To obstruct the progress of the 
state" is certainly a fine sounding 
phrase, for surely no one would like 
to see a minority continually stand- 
ing in the way of this great state's 
progress, but it is plainly evident 
that some of the people of that state 
are not satisfied with a part of the 
work done by their legislature. Under 
the referendum amendment it is 
their privilege to express their opin- 
ion of that work, and to induce as 
many people as they can to join 
them in protesting against it. If 
these can succeed in getting 10 per- 
cent, of the vote for governor at the 
last election, which in this case would 
mean about 8,000 voters, to favor 
a Referendum on these fourteen 
measures, would it not be fair to as- 
sume that there might be a serious 
difference of opinion as to whether 
those measures actually would "ob- 
struct the progress of the State" or 
not? And if such a considerable 
difference of opinion exists as to 
these matters, might it not be worth 
while to get a decision from the en- 
tire electorate? It may be true that 
this will necessitate no little incon- 
venience to certain people or institu- 
tions whose work is contingent upon 
the prompt execution of these laws. 
It may be also true that their going 



into effect would mean as the Herald 
says, the "progress of the state." 

But the fact remains that if 8,000 
or more voters can be found who 
hold these measures objectionable, 
then it does seem the part of wisdom 
to have the questions involved form- 
ally presented to the people of the 
state at the next election in such 
form that the voters can say "yes" 
or "no." 

If the objections raised by the 
petitioners are superficial and their 
criticism of the legislature captious, 
we can rest assured that the voters 
of North Dakota will do to these peti- 
tioners what the voters of Oregon 
did to the objectors to the education- 
al appropriations, namely, repudiate 
them. But let no one get away with 
the impression given by the Herald, 
and other papers holding its views, 
that because a referendum petition is 
started by a small group of voters 
and is made effective by 10 percent, 
of the electorate, that this necessar- 
ily implies interference with the 
progress of the state by a small 
minority of malcontents. It may be 
that in the first year of a state's ex- 
perience with the Referendum, a cer- 
tain number of people can be found 
who will sign petitions on request 
and without a fair knowledge of all 
the facts involved. But the exper- 
ience of Oregon and other states 
which have had these "tools of dem- 
ocracy" in use for a number of years 
is that it becomes more and more 
difficult to obtain signers to initiative 
and referendum petitions without be- 
ing able to give some reason appeal- 
ing to the intelligence and interest 
of the voter. 

In any event, the fact stands out 
impressively that duly recognized this 
power of the voters to hold up par- 
ticular measures, which a consider- 
able number believe to be harmful, 



180 



Equity 



must inevitably have the effect of 
causing legislatures to do their work 
more conscientiously and efficiently. 
No one will deny that much of the 
work of our state legislatures in the 
past has been faulty and corrupt. We 
are not here passing judgment on 
the work of this particular session 
of the North Dakota legislature, but 
we would warn all against jumping 
to the hasty conclusion that the 
movement to refer some of its meas- 
ures is necessarily interfering with 
the best interests of progress of that 
state. 



"Amended to Destruction" 

How the opportunity to amend 
measures introduced in our state 
legislatures may be used to defeat 
the purpose of the members or 
groups of members who have propos- 
ed them is well illustrated by the 
fate of the Philadelphia housing re- 
form bill at the hands of the legisla- 
ture recently adjourned. The story 
of this bill was made the subject of 
an illuminating editorial in the Phila- 
delphia Ledger under the above title. 
It appears that the bill was a com- 
promise between legislators who 
found it to their interest to work for 
bad housing and those social workers 
who feel that the poor in our great 
cities are entitled "to something bet- 
ter than a leaking roof and a few 
hundred cubic feet of foul air." 

No less than twelve concessions of 
requirements, deemed fair and 
urgent, had been made by the hous- 
ing commission in order to obtain 
the consent of the opposing members 
of the House of Representatives that 
the bill should pass. Thus seriously 
injured by unfriendly amendment 
but not entirely worthless, the bill 
was passed by the House and went 
to the Senate. There certain sen- 
ators, whom the Ledger describes as 



being "skilled in making corruption 
profitable," took advantage of their 
privilege of amendment to render 
this measure utterly impotent against 
the housing evils, and corresponding- 
ly favorable to political plunder. As 
amended the bill virtually suspended 
for the next seven months all hous- 
ing legislation, compelling thousands 
of poor to endure for that period 
their loathsome surroundings. But 
even after that long delay, its oper- 
ation was made contingent on the 
approval of the city councils, with no 
certainty that such approval would 
ever be given. But even if it should 
go into effect, the plight of the badly 
housed would be made worse. Of this 
legislative pettifogging the Ledger 
says: 

Such palpable rascality as this 
measure contains will not find its way 
into the statute books, despite the 
action of the Senate, unless both the 
House and Governor Brumbaugh are 
willing- to besmirch themselves by 
fostering- it. 

This instance may help us to clar- 
ify the often confused matter of the 
right to amend bills proposed in 
legislative bodies or initiated by 
popular mandate. The fact that 
measures proposed under the state- 
wide Initiative are not subject to 
amendment has been often held up to 
severe criticism by the opponents of 
direct popular control of government. 
They would have us believe that the 
absence of the opportunity for 
amendment is a serious objection to 
the initiative process of legislation. 
We are perfectly willing to admit 
that if a method can be worked out 
along the line of the Massachusetts 
plan, where all amendments to initia- 
tive measures may be proposed and 
adopted so long as they are accept- 
able to the committee responsible for 
the measures, such a method might 
favor the ends of good government 
and justice. 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



181 



But it is most important for any- 
one who would get at the truth of 
this matter to make a sharp and 
clear distinction between amend- 
ments to any given measure propos- 
ed by its friends and those proposed 
by its enemies. For it may be read- 
ily seen that amendments offered by 
the enemies of a measure may utterly 
defeat its purpose, just as was done 
in the case of the Philadelphia hous- 
ing reform law above referred to. 
In this connection, it would be well 
to remind ourselves of the custom in 
all our legislative bodies, from Con- 
gress down, of enabling a responsible 
majority party to protect its meas- 
ures from antagonistic amendments 
by resorting to oath-bound caucus 
action. Only in this way is the ma- 
jority party able to protect itself 
from the abuse of the amending 
power. 

With these facts in mind, it is more 
easy to understand why friends of 
the Initiative have not been willing 
to give to legislatures the power to 
amend measures initiated by the vo- 
ters. It was perfectly apparent that 
the permission of such opportunity 
to amend would be to play directly 
into the hands of interests which 
might defeat proposed legislation of 
value to the public, without ever 
having given the public an opportun- 
ity to vote upon the original proposi- 
tion. 

Here we are able to see the great 
danger in this abuse of the amending 
power, especially when applied to 
legislation by means of the Initiative. 
But there is nothing in the history of 
initiated laws to indicate that meas- 
ures thus enacted, without opportun- 
ity for amendment, are inferior to 
the best output of the existing legis- 
latures. In fact, the measures 
adopted by the Initiative have stood 
the fire of criticism remarkably and 



not one of them has ever been in- 
validated by the courts. As much 
cannot be said of the work of our 
legislatures, many of their acts be- 
ing found faulty or invalid every 
year. 

The reason for the higher standard 
of initiative measures is that the 
proponents, being conscious of the 
importance of their undertaking and 
the impossibility of amendment, once 
their bills are offered, generally ob- 
tain the assistance of several men, 
some of whom are experts in law and 
the use of English, to formulate their 
legislative propositions. 



Amendment of Initiated Bills 

We have received the following 
letter concerning a feature of the 
Cleveland, Ohio, charter which de- 
serves to be better understood by 
students of government and especial- 
ly by the people of cities which are 
engaged in revising old and outworn 
charters: 

May 1, 1915. 
DR. CHARLES F. TAYLOR, 

Philadelphia, Pa. 
My dear Dr. Taylor: 

In the January number of "Equity," 
you have, on pages 27-28, some ac- 
count of the proposed Initiative and 
Referendum amendment to the Mass- 
achusetts Constitution. 

I think that you might be interested 
to know, if your attention has not 
already been called to the fact, that 
what you indicate as the essential and 
most interesting feature of the Mass- 
achusetts plan, is already a part of 
the Charter of the City of Cleveland, 
adopted July 1, 1913. 

In other words, I think these pro- 
visions of the Cleveland charter are 
the first instance in which this form 
of the Initiative has been embodied in 
a law. 

The essential features of the Cleve- 
land charter, in this respect, are as 
follows: 

Section 50. Any proposed or- 
dinance may be submitted to the 



182 



Equity 



council by petition signed by at least 
five thousand (5,000) qualified elec- 
tors of the city. All petition papers, 
circulated with respect to any pro- 
posed ordinance, shall be uniform 
in character and shall contain the 
proposed ordinance in full, and have 
printed thereon the names and ad- 
dresses of at least five electors who 
shall be officially regarded as filing 
the petition and shall constitute a 
committee of the petitioners for the 
purpose hereinafter named. 
Then follow several sections, pro- 
viding for the manner of signing, fil- 
ing, and verifying the petitions. 

Section 55. When the certificate 
of the clerk shows the petition to 
be sufficient, he shall submit the 
proposed ordinance to the council 
at its next regular meeting and the 
council shall at once read and re- 
fer the same to an appropriate com- 
mittee, which may be the committee 
of the whole. Provision shall be 
made for public hearings upon the 
proposed ordinance before the com- 
mittee to which it is referred. 
Thereafter the committee shall re- 
port the proposed ordinance to the 
council, with its recommendations 
thereon, not later than the third 
regular meeting of the council fol- 
lowing that at which the proposed 
ordinance was submitted to the 
council by the clerk. 

Section 56. Upon receiving the 
proposed ordinance from the com- 
mittee, the council shall at once 
proceed to consider it and shall 
take final action thereon within 
thirty (30) days from the date of 
such committee report. If the coun- 
cil reject the proposed ordinance, or 
pass it in a form different from that 
set forth in the petition, the com- 
mittee of the petitioners may re- 
quire that it be submitted to a vote 
of the electors in its original form, 
or that it be submitted to a vote of 
the electors with any proposed 
change, addition or amendment, 
which was presented in writing 
either at a public hearing before 
the committee to which such pro- 
posed ordinance was referred, or 
during the consideration thereof by 
the council. 



Section 57. When an ordinance 
proposed by petition is to be sub- 
mitted to a vote of the electors, the 
committee of the petitioners shall 
certify that fact and the proposed 
ordinance to the clerk of the council 
within ten (10) days after the final 
action on such proposed ordinance 
by the council. 

In other words, the Cleveland 
charter satisfies all of the demands 
for public discussion and the possibil- 
ity of amendment of initiated or- 
dinances as a result of such discus- 
sion. 

Very truly yours, 

A. R. Hatton. 



Senator Lodge Answered 

The surprising thing about Sen- 
ator Lodge's latest book is the num- 
ber of vulnerable points in it. 

It is a volume of 297 pages, con- 
sisting of eleven addresses and es- 
says.* The purpose of the first five 
of these papers, as intimated in the 
preface, is to oppose the Initiative 
and Referendum and the recall of 
judges and of judicial decisions. The 
most important address in the book 
is "The Constitution and its Makers," 
delivered before the Literary and 
Historical Association of North Caro- 
lina, at Raleigh, Nov. 28, 1911. This 
has been republished as Senate Doc- 
ument 122, 62nd Congress, 2nd Ses- 
sion, and in that form it has been 
circulated widely by the opponents 
of the I. and R., and its seeds of er- 
ror have unfortunately taken root in 
many places. 

Here we come face to face with a 
great scholar, forceful writer and a 
charming speaker; but who has a 
psychology that we must examine 
before we can safely follow his lead. 
On page 160 he says that his family 



♦The Democracy of the Constitution 
and other Addresses and Essays. By 

Henry Cabot Lodge, Charles Scribner's 
Sons. 1915. $1.50. 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



183 



were friends and followers of Hamil- 
ton, Webster and Sumner, and refers 
to himself as "so bred and taught." 
He has "steeped himself in history," 
and has become! a historian of consid- 
erable fame. Thus his mind has been 
molded chiefly by the past; and un- 
fortunately it seems to have crystal- 
ized in these past conceptions, as we 
shall see. 

The first address in the book is 
one in opposition to a Public Opinion 
bill that was before the Mass- 
achusetts legislature in 1907. After 
voters have elected candidates, he 
would permit them no further privi- 
lege whatever in public affairs. He 
would permit them the ancier, t right 
of petition — the kind of petitions that 
are tossed about with laughter in 
Jegislative assemblies. But he would 
not permit even a mild expression of 
opinion on an official ballot. 

Thus we see how vehemently he 
would oppose the Initiative and Ref- 
erendum, which is not only an ex- 
pression of opinion on a ballot, but 
carries authority with it. And why? 
Because the authors of the United 
States constitution did not include 
these things in that document. He 
does not seem to realize that 
these instruments of government 
were not then known; and if they had 
been, they would not have suited the 
conditions then, because popular edu- 
cation and the popular press did not 
then exist; and the I. and R. were 
not needed then, because there were 
no great and powerful corporations 
to corrupt representative govern- 
ment. 

Here we have the author and a por- 
tion of his psychology. Further, he 
is obsessed with the belief that some- 
body wants to destroy the United 
States constitution. The writer of 
this review considers that document 
one of the greatest in human history, 



and he knows of no movement for its 
destruction. Our constitution keeps 
the peace among 48 states covering a 
territory larger than all Europe, 
where such a disastrous war is now 
in progress. When we realize all that 
this means, we almost feel like fall- 
ing on our knees and worshiping our 
national constitution. But that does 
not imply that, after service of a 
century and a quarter, it cannot be 
improved to meet new conditions and 
demands. In fact it has been amend- 
ed recently, but the process of 
amendment is too difficult. Senator 
Lodge is in a frenzy of fear that the 
I. and R. advocates will move de- 
structively on the national constitu- 
tion. This danger is purely imagin- 
ary. While they think that the time 
may come when some concrete issue 
may advantageously be placed on the 
national ballot, they are now far too 
busy with state constitutions and 
municipal charters to give attention 
to anything else. So Senator Lodge 
may calm his fears. 

But while talking about the Unit- 
ed States constitution, he launches 
bitter and erroneous arguments 
against the I. and R. that should 
here be noticed. He insists that the 
I. and R. would "break down the 
representative principle" in our gov- 
ernment; and he intimates that we 
wish to destroy representative bodies 
and replace them with direct govern- 
ment. Here he is wrong again. We 
agree with him heartily that the 
representative system is one of the 
greatest developments that was ever 
made in the art of government. It 
is far too precious to sacrifice. We 
could not now get along without it. 
But it can be improved. The I. and 
R. guide and perfect the representa- 
tive system. Where the I. and R. 
have been most used, about 90 per 
cent, of the legislation is still done 



184 



Equity 



by the legislature. And in some 
states and in many municipalities 
possessing these new instruments, 
they have been used very little or not 
at all. Does that look like supplant- 
ing representative government? 

A transparent error in the Sen- 
ator's argument is the following, 
which was fully exposed by the pres- 
ent writer in Senate Document No. 
651, 62nd Congress, 2nd Session, to 
which the reader is referred.* Briefly 
it is this: Chiefly in his Raleigh ad- 
dress Senator Lodge contends that 
the Initiative and Referendum work 
suddenly, and in the heat of passion. 
Repeatedly such expressions as the 
following occur: "the present pas- 
sion;" "their momentary impulse;" 
"passion of the hour;" "rash, hasty 
and passionate action;" "as quick in 
response as a hair-trigger pistol and 
as rapid in operation as a self-cock- 
ing revolver." If the learned Sen- 
ator will examine the constitutions of 
South Dakot?, Oregon, California, 
Arkansas, Missouri, Ohio, Maine, 
Michigan, or any other state in which 
the voters are privileged to use these 
two instruments of government, he 
will find they are the most deliberate 
of all the governmental processes 
now in use. If a law is referred, the 
petitions demanding the Referendum 
must be completed and formally 
lodged with the secretary of state 
within 90 days after the adjournment 
of the legislature which passed the 
law, and the vote is not taken until 
the next regular state election, which 
is usually nearly two years after- 
ward! Any haste or passion about 
this? Candidates are before the elec- 
torate only a few months; some- 
times only one or two months. Which 
is the most "hasty" and "passion- 
ate?" 

*Will be sent free on request. Ad- 
dress "Equity." 



The Initiative is, in a way, even 
a more deliberate and serious pro- 
cess, as all Equity readers well 
know; so we will not repeat details. 

The "haste" statement concerning 
the I. and R. is a surprising error 
for a deep student like Senator 
Lodge to make; and unfortunately 
many have innocently accepted this 
glaring error as gospel truth. The 
Senator owes it to his reputation to 
correct it. 

It is well known that many laws 
are made by legislatures in turbulent 
haste, particularly during the closing 
days of a session. Such turbulent 
haste is impossible in legislation by 
means of the I. and R., which is the 
most deliberate, orderly process 
known, and the most free from pas- 
sion. Also corruption is practically 
impossible in the operations of the 
I. and R. In fact these two instru- 
ments are the best remedies known 
for corruption in legislative bodies. 

Senator Lodge should revise the 
first five articles in this book to ac- 
cord with well known facts. The re- 
maining six articles in this book can 
be read with delight, and without 
the painful jarring with established 
facts that we find in the first five. 



Voting by Age Group 

Mr. Alfred Blauvelt, of 175 W. 
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, suggests 
that the voters of each precinct be 
divided into "juniors" (aged from 21 
to 34 years), "middles" (from 34 to 
51) and "seniors" (those older than 
51 years). In determining the vote 
of the precinct, he would give the vic- 
tory to the two highest groups in 
the precinct. He thinks that this 
would stimulate the voters of all the 
groups to come out and cast a full 
vote. This is a novel remedy for the 
stay-at-home vote. 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



185 



The March of 
Popular Government 



California 

A new era in the political history 
of California, amounting to a polit- 
ical revolution, is marked by the en- 
actment of the so-called "non- 
partisan" bill by the 1915 legislature, 
which was signed by Governor John- 
son on April 29. 

Prior to this, non-partisan elections 
had been established in the cities and 
counties of the state and had been 
generally accepted as a success. In 
those sub-divisions men had been ac- 
customed to run for public office on 
their individual record or reputation 
or force of character and not on their 
connection with a particular party 
organization. 

Now this method is enlarged to 
include all state elective offices. 
Political parties cease to have any 
official standing as to all such elec- 
tions. But the existing parties will 
still find opportunity for their func- 
tioning in the choice of members of 
Congress, United States Senators 
and presidential electors. 

On the day that he signed this bill, 
to which the Progressive party of 
California had been pledged, Gover- 
nor Johnson took the opposition by 
surprise by declaring that he would 
welcome a referendum on this meas- 
ure and would assist in securing it, 
so confident was he of the approval 
of the people. 

The legislature of its own volition 
submitted nine propositions to the 
voters at the next state election, as 
follows: 

To lengthen the terms of superior 
judges from six to twelve years. 

To eliminate "short term" judges by- 
making the appointees' hold over un- 
til the end of the unexpired term. 



To permit the state to loan its 
credit to private persons and corpora- 
tions, a rural credit measure. 

To safeguard the initiative and pro- 
vide that no bond issue may be initia- 
ted unless it is carried by a two- 
thirds vote. 

To make it possible for a city which 
wishes to open a park to purchase the 
adjoining land and sell at the advanc- 
ed price caused by the improvement. 

To remove constitutional restric- 
tion from the legislature in the mat- 
ter of adopting a new taxation sys- 
tem. 

Relating to the exemption of 
churches from taxation, permitting 
exemption in case an admission is* 
charged for entertainment. 

Relating- to charters of counties. 

To make a legislative investigation 
of question of free text-books for 

high schools. 

* * * 

A medical editor knows the value 
of the Initiative. Dr. Geo. E. Mols- 
bary, editor of the Southern Cali- 
fornia Practitioner, Los Angeles, drew 
an Initiative petition for an or- 
dinance providing for the employ- 
ment of visiting tuberculosis nurses. 
The petition was signed by 20,000 
voters, more than four times the re- 
quired number, and at the city elec- 
tion, June first, it was passed by di- 
rect vote of the voters by a vote of 
nearly two to one (47,359 for, to 25,- 
681 against). When the thought and 
sentiments of the voting public get 
ahead of the city council, the voters 
can themselves pass ordinances ne- 
glected by the slow-going council — 
if the city has the Initiative. 

Illinois 

During several years past power- 
ful political groups have contested 
with one another over the question as 
to what is the best way to overcome 
the frailties of the old constitution 
of Illinois. One of the chief diffi- 
culties with that old instrument is 
that under it only one constitutional 
amendment can be submitted at one 



186 



Equity 



time. Hence, there has been antag- 
onism between a group that wishes a 
certain tax amendment and another 
group that wishes an I. and R. 
amendment, and still another group 
that desires to first amend the 
amending clause of the constitution 
so that it will permit three or more 
amendments to be submitted at one 
time; another large group has been 
favoring a constitutional convention 
for the entire over-hauling of the old 
instrument. Perhaps there are other 
groups, but the above mentioned have 
been sufficient to make the politics 
in Illinois concerning constitutional 
amending very stirring, bitter and 
uncertain. It is doubted by some 
that the tax amendment group are 
sincere. It is charged that they put 
that forward only to prevent an I. 
and R. amendment being submitted, 
and when the tax amendment is sub- 
mitted, and carried or lost as the 
case may be, then the same group 
will unite on some other amendment 
in order to bar out an I. and R. 
amendment. Thus you see an I. and 
R. amendment can be indefinitely 
postponed. 

The contest in the legislature this 
year has been between the ,group 
favoring an amendment to the 
amending clause and the tax amend- 
ment group. Usually the contest 
among these various groups results 
in no amendment at all being submit- 
ted, but this year the tax amend- 
ment group has been victorious; a 
resolution has been passed to submit 
to the voters of the state an amend- 
ment to the constitution permitting 
the abolition of the general property 
tax and giving the legislature power 
to alter the tax system without re- 
striction. 

* * * 

Bloomington was added (May 7) to 
the list of Illinois cities operating 



under the commission form of gov- 
ernment. 

Massachusetts 

This year's session of the "General 
Court" (legislature) of Massachu- 
setts ended on June 6 with a number 
of rather progressive laws to its 
credit, but without taking action on 
the I. and R. amendment. The op- 
tional city charter bill, the report of 
which we published in April Equity 
(page 117), was finally passed. 
Three constitutional amendments 
were submitted to the voters by the 
lawmakers, as follows: woman suf- 
frage, the taxation of incomes and 
the granting of power to the general 
court to authorize the taking of land 
to relieve congestion of population in 
the cities and to provide homes for 
the people. 

Michigan 

A local election of general interest 
took place in Kalamazoo on April 5, 
when by an overwhelming majority 
a proposition for a bond issue to 
build a municipal gas plant was 
adopted. At the same time a prop- 
osition to grant a new franchise to 
the gas company and fix the price of 
gas at 85c was rejected. A proposi- 
tion to extend the present municipal 
lighting plant so as to furnish light 
and power to private individuals 
carried by a vote of six to one. 
Every member of the new council 
elected is pledged to municipal 
ownership; and this result is regard- 
ed as the culmination of a cam- 
paign conducted for several years 
under the leadership of A. M. Todd. 

Minnesota 

The legislature of Minnesota has 
again submitted to the voters of the 
state an initiative and referendum 
amendment to the constitution along 
with seven other proposed amend- 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



187 



ments. The House passed a bill for 
an I. and R. amendment, which was 
in many respects excellent. It provid- 
ed for the direct constitutional Initia- 
tive, and required a 60 percent, ma- 
jority of those voting on a constitu- 
tional amendment. Then the Senate 
passed a bill similar to that submit- 
ted at the last election, with all its 
uncertainties and ambiguities, but 
made even more worthless by requir- 
ing a majority of all voting at the 
election on constitutional amend- 
ments, instead of a majority of those 
voting on the proposition. 

The House refused to accept the 
Senate's amendments and the bill 
went to conference where a com- 
promise was agreed on which left 
the bill substantially the same meas- 
ure as was submitted to the people 
at the last election. In this form it 
was passed. 

Nebraska 

A proposal to have the legislature 
authorize the calling of a constitu- 
tional convention for Nebraska was 
introduced at the recent session of 
the legislature, but failed to receive 
a majority vote. Nevertheless, we 
are informed that initiative petitions 
were immediately put in circulation 
with a view to forcing a submission 
of this question at the next election. 
Among measures enacted were the 
creation of an efficiency commission, 
and another creating a state budget 
system of which the governor is to be 
the head. 

New Jersey 

The men sent to Trenton to serve 
as law makers this year were not at 
all backward about coming forward 
with new measures. There were in- 
troduced in both houses, 1,230 bills 
and more than a score of joint and 
concurrent resolutions. Of the 1,230 



bills, 413 were enacted into laws; be- 
sides, six joint resolutions and three 
concurrent resolutions were enacted. 

After the woman suffrage special 
election bill had passed both branches 
at this session, presumably in iden- 
tical form with its first enactment at 
the preceding session, it was discov- 
ered that the wording of the bill had 
been so badly bungled that the valid- 
ity of the election would be in doubt. 
To remedy this defect, a special ses- 
sion of the legislature was convened 
on May 2. But this was not the only 
blunder made by this legislature, 
thirty-four members of which were 
listed as "lawyers." About 450 
measures reached the governor and 
of these 81 were found to be glaring- 
ly defective, or about one in six. 

Besides the woman suffrage amend- 
ment, two other changes in the con- 
stitution were submitted by con- 
current resolutions. One of these 
would authorize the legislature to en- 
able municipalities to include excess 
land in condemnation for public pur- 
poses. The other removes the exist- 
ing restriction against submitting 
constitutional amendments oftener 
than once in five years. (See April 
Equity, page 120). The Hutchinson 
resolution granting broad home rule 
powers to municipalities appears to 
have been put to sleep by the special 
privilege forces that fought it from 
the start of the session. 

New York 

An interesting game is in progress 
at Albany. The constitutional con- 
vention in session there is earnestly 
discussing many propositions for im- 
provement and amendment of the 
old constitution. 

It has often been observed that 
constitutional conventions are made 
up of a much higher type of member- 
ship and larger intellectual caliber 



188 Equity 

than the ordinary state legislature. 
Hence, the high percentage of statu- 
tory matter that has found its way 
into state constitutions is usually of 
superior quality. 

However, we are still waiting for 
the time when a constitutional con- 
vention shall be sufficiently progres- 
sive to write a constitution which 
shall be short and confined entirely 
to purely constitutional matter, and 
not include any statutory matter. 
That kind of a constitution will pro- 
vide for a state legislature of a 
smaller and better membership, 
which, acting under such a constitu- 
tion, will produce legislation of high- 
er quality than that put out by our 
present legislatures. 

While nothing has been definitely 
settled at Albany, a few straws are 
indicative. For example, it is prob- 
able that a woman suffrage amend- 
ment will be submitted in order to 
put that matter up to the voters 
clearly and definitely, and hence re- 
lieve the convention of any decision 
concerning same. If we could induce 
the convention to similarly submit a 
good I. and R. amendment, that is 
all that the I. and R. advocates would 
ask of the convention. We do not 
ask the convention to take any posi- 
tion either for or against the Initia- 
tive and Referendum; but we do ask 
the convention to allow the voters to 
decide "yes" or "no" on a good 
amendment. 

It is interesting to note that the 
committee on "Legislative Organiza- 
tion" has decided, by a vote of 14 to 
2, to report adversely four amend- 
ments designed to establish the leg- 
islature as one house. The amend- 
ments reported adversely include 
that of President Schurman of Cor- 
nell, providing for a reduction of the 
membership of the state Senate 
from 51 to 24, six of these to be 



elected from the state at large. Others 
were by William M. McKinney, Re- 
publican, of Suffolk, providing that 
the legislature shall comprise only a 
state senate of sixty members for 
terms of four years at $5,000 a year; 
Hiram M. Kirk, Democrat, of New 
York city, providing that the legisla- 
ture shall comprise an assembly on!y 
of 168 members, including fifteen 
members at large from New York 
city, for terms of three years at sal- 
aries of $3,000; J. Sidney Bernstein, 
Democrat, of New York city, estab- 
lishing the legislature in one house 
to be known as the state senate of 
100 members for terms of two years 
at salaries of $3,000. 

The above defects indicate that the 
convention is a very conservative one. 
and that the politicians will not con- 
sent to a reduction in the number of 
offices. The Brooklyn labor men have 
issued a manifesto declaring that 
"'Defeat a Reactionary Constitution" 
will be the slogan at the election if 
such a constitution is submitted. 

Of course, it is impossible at the 
present time to say what the final 
action of the convention will be. We 
will hope that the convention will do 
great credit to itself. It has an op- 
portunity to set a standard for future 
state coventions. Will it rise to 
its opportunity? 

North Dakota 

In the editorial section of this issue 
the effort to referend fourteen laws 
just passed by the legislature of 
North Dakota is discussed quite 
fully. At this writing not enough 
voters have signed the petitions to 
make them effective, but the prospect 
of success is said to be good, espec- 
ially of the two which are backed by 
the Equity Co-operative Exchange, 
of Fargo, which organization has a 
membership of about 3,000 in this 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



189 



state, and publishes a paper known 
as the Co-operators' Herald. Among 
others taking an active part in this 
first referendum campaign are F. 0. 
Hellstrom, former Democratic candi- 
date for governor, and John Knauf, 
of Jamestown. 

Prior to the starting of these ref- 
erendum petitions, an effort was 
made by interests opposed to the I. 
and R. to have the new amendment 
attacked on technical grounds, one 
claim being that the amendment was 
approved by the legislature a second 
time in different wording than at the 
first passage. Further it was found 
that the amendment was not entered 
in full upon the journal of the House 
and Senate. It was also claimed that 
two different subjects were treated in 
the same amendment, the initiating 
of laws by the people and the re- 
ferring of acts by the legislature. 
But Attorney-General Linde at the 
request of Governor Hanna, render- 
ed an opinion sustaining the consti- 
tutionality of the I. and R. amend- 
ment. He held that the incorporation 
of the two propositions in one amend- 
ment does not invalidate an amend- 
ment passed by the people. Not- 
withstanding this opinion, it was ex- 
pected that the question would be 
further tested by formal action in the 
courts. 

Plans are said to be on foot for 
making use of the Initiative in con- 
nection with the reformation of the 
tax laws, and with a resubmission of 
the suffrage and prohibition ques- 
tions. 

At Fargo, on April 7, the first use 
was made of the Initiative and Ref- 
erendum (in that city), resulting 
favorably to the ordinance creating a 
permanent sinking fund for a fil- 
tration plant, which had been turned 
down by the City Commission. At 
the same time bond issues for a city 



market, abbattoir and garbage incin- 
erator were rejected by small major- 
ities. 

Pennsylvania 

Several important questions which 
came before the recent session of 
the Pennsylvania legislature, under 
great pressure of public opinion, re- 
main absolutely undetermined for 
lack of any means of ascertaining 
the majority sentiment of the elec- 
torate concerning them. 

First, as to local option. In spite 
of all the costly demonstrations of 
the thousands of people believing 
that this question should be submit- 
ted to local electorates for their de- 
cision, the legislature remained 
oblivious to that appeal. Even the 
efforts of Governor Brumbaugh to 
gain consideration for the local option 
bill proved futile and the measure 
was defeated by a large majority. 

The legislature did respond to the 
state-wide campaign of the railroad 
interests, carried on at enormous 
expense by means of pamphlets, 
model letters and newspaper public- 
ity in favor of the repeal of the Full 
Crew law. A repeal bill was duly 
introduced and passed both houses of 
the legislature. The railroad men 
were congratulating themselves on 
the success of their campaign while 
at the same time the labor interests 
were complaining at the action of the 
legislature. 

But the railroad men had not 
reckoned with the veto power of the 
governor. On June 20 Governor 
Brumbaugh, who had been vetoing 
various measures, applied the axe to 
the Full Crew repealer. In his mes- 
sage, explaining this veto, the gov- 
ernor said: 

There has 1 been much discussion of 
this bill. An extensive and systematic 
publicity campaign was inaugurated 
to secure its passage. The members 



190 



Equity 



of the legislature, so they informed 
me, were subjected to the pleadings 
of a large and persistent lobby until 
the bill had passed. Thousands of 
letters and other literature came to 
them and to the executive. 

With the arguments for and 
against the Full Crew law we are not 
here concerned. What we wish to draw 
attention to is the fact that the rail- 
road managers, who contend that the 
law is unjust to them, have found in 
the veto power a serious obstacle, not- 
withstanding their expensive public- 
ity campaign. The result is that the 
whole question is still up in the air, 
and no one today knows whether a 
majority of the voters of Pennsyl- 
vania are convinced that the Full 
Crew law is just and necessary to the 
safety of the workers and the travel- 
ing public or not. 

Nor is there any existing means of 
finding out what that majority opin- 
ion is. If the people who believe 
this law to be unjust had the means 
of requiring its submission to the 
voters at the next regular election, 
and a majority were to render its 
decision against the law, that would 
finally dispose of the proposition. In 
the initiative and referendum amend- 
ment to the constitution of Missouri 
occurs this passage: "The veto pow- 
er of the governor shall not extend 
to measures referred to the people." 
A similar provision is included in the 
initiative and referendum amend- 
ments in other states. Will the men 
who planned this publicity campaign 
in Pennsylvania take notice of this 
fact? 

A third proposition which received 
almost universal approval from the 
newspapers of the state was the 
Honey bill, authorizing the calling of 
a constitutional convention to revise 
the much patched and outworn funda- 
mental law of the state; but, as it 
did not suit the interests of the polit- 



ical machine bosses to have such a re- 
vision of the constitution at this time, 
this measure was defeated by a large 
majority. Compare this situation to 
that of the state of Colorado, where 
the recent legislature in that state 
also failed to respond to a general 
demand for the calling of a constitu- 
tional convention. There, under the 
constitutional initiative provision of 
the Colorado constitution, 8 percent, 
of the voters of the state may, by 
petition, compel the submission of 
this question of constitutional re- 
vision at the next regular state elec- 
tion. Why should not Pennsylvania 
and every other state also have this 
reserved power? As a sop to the 
public, the law-makers at Harrisburg 
created a commission to study and 
report on the subject of revision. 

The veto power in the hands of 
Governor Brumbaugh was used ef- 
fectively against another measure of 
interest to students of government, 
namely, the Clark bill to amend the 
initiative and referendum features of 
the third-class city act, under which 
over 30 cities of the state have now 
adopted the commission form of 
government. The feature of this bill 
to which the governor particularly 
objected was the part requiring the 
passage of an initiated ordinance 
without amendment. In the gover- 
nor's opinion this prohibits careful 
consideration and correction of an 
ordinance thus started, and "denies 
the right of utilizing the results of 
public study and criticism." 

South Dakota 

In the April Equity mention was 
made of the passage of a new pri- 
mary law by the legislature at its re- 
cent session to supersede the law 
initiated and adopted by the voters. 
In that connection we remarked that 
"the legislature should not be permit- 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



191 



ted by a mere majority to change or 
repeal a law made by the voters." 
We also expressed the opinion that 
"at least a three-fourths majority of 
the membership of both houses 
should be required to do this." We 
called attention to the fact that the 
South Dakota amendment was defec- 
tive in not having contained some 
such provision, and expressed the 
hope that if a constitutional conven- 
tion is held, this and other imper- 
fections of the amendment would be 
removed. 

We now learn that a number of 
men, prominent in the original move- 
ment for the Initiative and Referen- 
dum in South Dakota, have bestirred 
themselves concerning this action of 
the legislature in upsetting the Rich- 
ards Primary law. A letter signed 
by Father Robt. W. Haire, of Aber- 
deen; ex-Governor Andrew E. Lee, 
of Vermillion; Senator L. N. Crill. of 
Elk Point; Senator Jas. A. Grant, of 
Clark; H. L. Loucks, of Watertown; 
and E. J. Berdahl, of Garretson, has 
been sent to R. O. Richards, of 
Huron, urging him to contest the 
constitutionality of this legislative 
repeal by carrying the case into the 
courts. The writers of this letter 
say that they "view with indignation 
and resentment the attempt being 
made to substitute the rule of a few 
for government by the people." They 
admit that in the initial I. and R. 
amendment they were at a disadvan- 
tage in not having a precedent to 
guide them but insist that their in- 
tention was very clearly expressed. 
They argue with force as follows: 

"It would have been ridiculous in 
the extreme to propose to go to the 
expense and labor of initiating and 
conducting a state-wide campaign to 
enact a law in November by direct 
vote of the people, that a legislature, 
elected at the same time, could re- 
peal in the following January. We 



also provided that the legislature 
should have the same right to pro- 
pose direct legislation, but without 
petition. Any member may propose 
and if both branches of the legisla- 
ture concur, it will be submitted to 
a direct vote of the people. 

"To discourage the legislature from 
enacting unsatisfactory laws, we pro- 
vided that any measure enacted, ex- 
cept those specifically exempted, 
should in like manner, by petition, 
be submitted to a vote of the people. 
To defeat this constitutional safe- 
guard, they have resorted to the ex- 
pedient of adding an emergency 
clause, where no emergency existed 
(enacting an untruth) and falsely 
claiming that that barred a referen- 
dum, and thus they have practically 
annulled the constitution. 

"Thus the issue has been clearly 
drawn by the late legislature in at- 
tempting to repeal a law that had 
been adopted by the direct vote of the 
people, and attaching a fake emer- 
gency clause to the repealing enact- 
ment; the avowed object of which was, 
by subterfuge, to prevent the use of 
our constitutional right of referen- 
dum. A paramount issue in this state 
has once more been forced upon us. 
Shall the people of the whole state or 
a mere faction of one political party 
be supreme? That this issue may be 
determined at the earliest possible 
date, and finally settled beyond all 
question, we request you to press for- 
ward for the freedom of the ballot 
and supremacy of the people, by mak- 
ing a thorough test in our state 
courts, and federal courts, also if 
necessary. 

It is to be hoped that action will 
be taken to bring about a legal test 
of the repeal law enacted by the leg- 
islature. 

Virginia 

The Citizens' party of Norfolk, Va., 
has adopted as one plank of its plat- 
form the demand for the Initiative, 
Referendum and Recall for all the 
cities of the state, judges being ex- 
cepted from the operation of the Re- 
call. 



192 



Equity 



The League of Virginia Municipal- 
ities is to receive and act on the re- 
port of its committee, named for the 
purpose of drafting a municipal re- 
call bill before the meeting of the 
next legislature. It is known that 
this report will have the backing of 
organized labor and of the Farmers' 
Union, as well as that of a large 
number oif men prominent in the 
Democratic party. This report is 
expected to be a strong factor in 
putting through an I., R. and R. 
amendment at the next session of the 
legislature. 

Washington 

There's an old saying that "he who 
laughs last, laughs best." And it 
has a certain application to the polit- 
ical situation in the state of Wash- 
ington just at this time. In order to 
make this latest turn of events clear, 
it must be recalled how the 1915 
legislature, elected on the crest of 
last year's reactionary wave, enacted 
several laws designed to make the 
initiative and referendum system in 
that state practically a dead letter. 
(See April Equity, page 125). This 
was to be done on the pretense of 
safeguarding the process by requir- 
ing all signers of I. and R. petitions 
to go to the clerk's office to sign 
them; also by making it a crime for 
anyone to circulate I. and R. peti- 
tions. Another measure would restore 
the caucus-primary convention for 
nominating candidates. 

The passage of these laws and sev- 
eral others, over the veto of Gover- 
nor Lister, was heralded over the en- 
tire country by the reactionary 
papers as a sign that the voters of 
Washington were getting tired of the 
whole business of direct control of 
legislation. But most of these 
papers neglected to state that these 
laws were themselves subject to a 



referendum if a sufficient number of 
voters should petition for it. 

Nevertheless this was the fact and, 
furthermore, the voters were alive to 
the danger confronting their hard- 
won rights. Petitions were im- 
mediately circulated throughout the 
state by the Referendum League, the 
Joint Legislative Committee of the 
Farmers' Union, Grange and Federa- 
tion of Labor, and other bodies. De- 
spite the bitter opposition of the en- 
tire standpat press, seven referen- 
dum petitions were filed with the 
Secretary of State at Seattle on June 
9, within the 90-days limit, each with 
51,000 names of voters signed to it, 
whereas only 35,000 names were nec- 
essary to refer. 

Now these measures are held up 
until the entire electorate shall have 
an opportunity, at the next regular 
state election, in November, 1916, to 
render a majority decision on the 
questions involved. This will give 
ample time for a deliberate public 
discussion and study of the whole 
matter. No haste or lack of con- 
sideration here. Both sides will have 
a chance to reason with the voters. 
If a majority of the voters then 
register their opinion in favor of 
these laws, then it will mean that 
they desire to surrender their power 
to control their own government. But 
if a majority of the voters reject 
these laws, it will mean their un- 
willingness to surrender such control 
of their government; and in that 
case, the people of Washington may 
have the "last laugh" on the political 
bosses and tools of special interests 
who put through the last legislature 
this scheme to destroy popular gov- 
ernment in Washington. 



"Referendum and Initiative. two 
methods by which the wishes of the 
general bodv of electors in a constitu- 
tional state may be expressed with 
regard to proposed legislation." — En- 
cyclopedia Brittanica. 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



193 



HOW TO LOCATE 

RESPONSIBILITY 

This the Clue to Better State Gov- 
ernments, says Walker D. Hines, 
in the May, 1915 "Atlantic Month- 
ly." 

The title of the article by Mr. 
Hines is "Our Irresponsible State 
Governments," and the subject is 
handled in such a way as to make 
every reader thoroughly ashamed of 
these governments. As Mr. Hines 
says at the ou l tset, the American 
people are "practically unanimous 
in the belief that our state legisla- 
tures pass a great mass of unneces- 
sary laws, and that many of the nec- 
essary laws are crudely drawn, in- 
consistent with one another, badly 
adapted to the ends in view, and 
largely ineffective." 

He is further of the opinion that 
the people understand that the 
affairs of state governments are 
managed in a "thoroughly unbusiness- 
like way," that there is general dis- 
regard of state laws and laxity in 
their enforcement. 

Mr. Hines believes that these con- 
ditions are due to the fact that "our 
scheme of state government carries 
the idea of divided responsibility to 
such an extreme that no public 
official is or can be held responsible 
in an effective sense for making the 
law or for enforcing the law; that 
this condition reacts upon the public 
and renders its supervision of those 
in public life less vigilant and intel- 
ligent; and that these things tend to 
produce public officers without train- 
ing, talent, or sustained purpose for 
efficient public service." 

Taking up first the legislative de- 
partment, Mr. Hines makes as clear 
as daylight the necessity of accurate 
information and special capacity on 



the part of the lawmaker and the 
very general absence of these factors 
in the equation. But of even great- 
er importance than this is shown to 
be the necessity of fixing the re- 
sponsibility for a given measure or 
proposition. He finds that in our 
legislatures there is virtually no re- 
sponsible leadership, and that new 
members, without special training, 
continually crop up with all sorts of 
measures in the hope of gaining 
some local applause or notoriety 
thereby. 

Two Houses Make Matters Worse 

These evils, in the opinion of Mr. 
Hines, are not cured by the fact that 
measures have to pass two houses, 
but rather that they are intensified 
thereby, "because the mere splitting 
up of responsibility between the two 
houses makes each house even less 
attentive to the public interest than 
it would be if it had the sole re- 
sponsibility." So it happens that 
measures are rushed through either 
branch of the legislature with the 
reassuring hope or assumption that 
they may be amended or killed in the 
other house. 

But even when measures have 
passed both houses, they have yet to 
receive the approval of the executive, 
so that responsibility is always di- 
vided between the legislature and 
the executive in case of any contro- 
versy. 

What might be regarded as a cor- 
ollary to this main proposition of 
divided responsibility between the 
executive and legislative branches 
is the fact that "the legislature has 
no part in enforcing the laws." Here 
again we have a clear explanation of 
the ease with which impractical and 
improvident legislation is continually 
enacted by our legislatures, simply 
because the lawmakers themselves 



194 



Equity 



do not have the duty and responsibil- 
ity of putting these laws into effect. 
This situation is summed up by Mr. 
Hines in the following effective para- 
graph: 

"Thus we have a system without 
constitutional leadership in either 
house; with responsibility split up 
until it reaches the vanishing point; 
with no member, even the most 
active, feeling any concern except 
for his own small body of constit- 
uents; with each house able to shift 
the responsibility to the other; with 
both houses able to shift the re- 
sponsibility to the governor; and 
with the governor able to pass it back 
to the two houses. The legislature 
has no special concern as to whether 
its laws will be workable, and every 
member is anxious to pass a law 
because that is the only function 
which he has a chance to exercise." 

Executive Responsibility Divided 
But this is not the whole case 
against our state governments. Pass- 
ing to the executive department, we 
are reminded of what we all know 
to be the fact, but have not consider- 
ed in its relation to this question of 
fixing responsibility, namely, that 
the governor "has no power to en- 
force the laws and no substantial con- 
trol over the officers who do have 
that power." Usually the heads of 
various administrative departments 
are elected by the voters, and each 
is free to follow his own whims. 

It is further pointed out that in 
the enforcement of laws "no state 
officer representing the state as a 
whole has any definite function or 
power, beeause the enforcement of 
the laws generally rests with the 
various county authorities." This 
helps us to realize that law enforce- 
ment is essentially a local affair un- 
der existing conditions. The result 



is necessarily irregular and ineffi- 
cient efforts to enforce many laws 
which are of vital concern to the 
state as a whole. In line with this 
condition of affairs is the lack of any 
supervision of local prosecuting at- 
torneys by any department of the 
state government. An effort to 
ameliorate these conditions has re- 
sulted in the appointment of numer- 
ous state commissions to look after 
particular laws. These have proved 
expensive and have resulted in para- 
lyzing conflicts of authority. 
Hence Indifference of People 

On account of all these conditions, 
it is the opinion of Mr. Hines, that 
our people have come to take an at- 
titude of indifference and hopeless- 
ness toward the state governments; 
and he arrives at the conclusion that 
"our scheme of dividing responsibil- 
ity has been a school for the encour- 
agement of political inefficiency." It 
has resulted further in the refusal 
of capable men to accept important 
offices under conditions which would 
prevent their carrying out construc- 
tive policies from start to finish. 
This brings into public life a large 
proportion of officers who have no 
special qualifications; who express 
opinions and act upon them without 
investigation; and who are always 
sustained by the feeling that their 
part of the work is not complete and 
so they cannot be held personally 
responsible for failure. These are 
the conditions which make possible 
the baleful operations of our profes- 
sional politicians and party bosses. 

But is the situation entirely hope- 
less? Mr. Hines does not think so, 
nor do we. His first suggestion is 
that any change in the direction of 
providing a constitutional leadership 
in the legislature, responsible to the 
state as a whole, must be worthy 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



195 



of consideration. He thinks that the 
plan of giving the governor himself 
this leadership is probably best, be- 
cause it will overcome the separation 
of the lawmaking function from the 
law-enforcing function. 

A One-Chambered Legislature 
But this raises the no less impor- 
tant question as to whether a legis- 
lature to be most effective should be 
a single body instead of composed 
of two houses. As to the argument 
that a second chamber is necessary 
to correct the errors of the first, the 
answer is made that a single cham- 
ber in considering that its results 
will be final, will be likely to act with 
much greater deliberation and with a 
keener sense of its responsibility. It is 
evident that the present method 
makes each house careless of the re- 
sult; and it is more than likely that 
a single house would be far less 
careless. 

The very consideration of this rem- 
edy involves a reconsideration of the 
principle of separating legislative 
and executive departments which 
has been written into our federal 
and state constitutions. Mr. Hines 
points out that this idea, which 
originated with Montesquieu, has 
been shown by Mr. Bryce, in his 
" American Commonwealth," to have 
been the outgrowth of French abso- 
lutism and a misunderstanding of the 
trend of the British constitution, which 
at that time was undergoing a 
change. As to this crystalizing of 
Montesquieu's conception into lasting 
form, Mr. Hines asks: 

"Why should we necessarily adhere 
to this conception of an eighteenth 
century philosopher and refuse to 
take advantage of the evolution and 
improvement that are manifest in the 
British constitution?" 

In reply to the criticism of this 



remedy that the executive would be 
all the more likely to force his will 
upon the legislature, Mr. Hines be- 
lieves that the contrary would be 
true "because to a very great ex- 
tent the present predominance of the 
executive is due to the weakness of 
the legislature, and this weakness in 
turn is due to the enfeebling effects 
of the scattering of responsibility." 

What Mr. Hines very properly re- 
marks as a consideration of the 
highest importance in all these mat- 
ters is "the reflex action upon the 
public itself." He understands that 
finally "the public must be the gov- 
ernment, and public sentiment will 
control." The question is therefore 
asked is it is not worth while to 
adopt a plan of government which 
will tend most to educating the pub- 
lic in the functions of government? 
It is also asked if this purpose will 
not be promoted "by a plan under 
which the public will be able to lo- 
cate responsibility for governmental 
action, and by degrees will come to 
fix that responsibility and distribute 
rewards and punishments according- 
ly?" This is the plan involved in 
the adoption of the Short Ballot. 

To these final questions submitted 
by Mr. Hines' article we are prepared 
to answer unhesitatingly in the 
affirmative; and we also agree that 
the common interest would be pro- 
moted by "the removal of obstacles 
to intelligent and efficient action," 
for which the people themselves must 
be finally responsible. 

Yes, the value of locating respon- 
sibility for governmental action is a 
necessary and important step for- 
ward. But we would like to ask Mr. 
Hines if true representative gov- 
ernment can be attained without also 
enabling the voters of a political di- 
vision (city, county or state) to hold 
up any act of their representatives 



196 



Equity 



believed to be injurious to the public 
interest. That is the Referendum. 

We would like to ask also if true 
representation of the people can be 
secured by merely locating the re- 
sponsibility for official acts, unless 
the voters hold the power of correct- 
ing sins of omission on the part of 
their representatives by the process 
which enables a reasonably large 
number of the voters to demand the 
submission of any specific measure 
to the whole community — the Initia- 
tive. 

Let us make it clear and plain to 
all readers that the possession of 
these powers by the voters in no 
sense implies the continual or even 
the frequent use of them. Their 
mere existence as reserved powers 
of the sovereign people must in- 
evitably act as an incentive to 
greater efficiency on the part of 
those officials who would hold this 
concentrated authority and respon- 
sibility under the Short Ballot plan 
suggested by Mr. Hines. 



Limitation of the I. and R. 

From Long Beach, Cal., comes the 
news that the mayor of that city re- 
cently put in circulation initiatve 
petitions for the submission of an 
ordinance reducing the rate for 
manufactured gas from $1 to 85c per 
thousand feet, and to fix the rate for 
natural gas at 65c. In the opinion 
of the Los Angeles California Outlook 
this is "a. perversion of the Initiative, 
and as an abuse of Direct Legisla- 
tion." It believes that public utility 
laws should be fixed by experts after 
careful consideration of the interests 
of both consumers and investors. 
Probably the latter is the wiser 
method of dealing with the gas rate 
situation in any city; but it would 
be most unwise to arbitrarily pro- 
hibit the application of the Initiative 



to such a purpose or to similar pur- 
poses, as that would open the door 
to other limitations until the instru- 
ment of popular control might be so 
hampered and modified as to lose 
much of its power and value. It may 
be that the intelligence of the elec- 
torate in Long Beach will turn down 
this proposition to fix the gas rate 
by popular vote. But even if a prop- 
osition of this sort should win in a 
single instance, the mistake thus 
made would undoubtedly carry its 
own lesson impressively to the 
voters. 



The "Big Thing" in California 

Gilson Gardner, the distinguished 
Washington correspondent, while in 
California in June had a chat with 
Governor Johnson about what had 
been accomplished in that state by 
means of the Initiative and Referen- 
dum. In the long list of things 
mentioned were: elimination of the 
Southern Pacific, regulation of public 
utilities, correction of ballot law, 
minimum wage, child labor, compen- 
sation for industral accidents, prison 
reform, etc. But finally Gardner 
asked the governor what he regarded 
as the big achievement of his five 
years of work. The governor's reply 
was as follows: 

The bi'g thing: has been the breaking: 
down of that old cynicism in regard to 
the possibility of people's government. 
In place of that hopelessness with 
which the political and governmental 
problem was regarded, we have sub- 
stituted popular self-confidence and a 
knowledge among the people that 
what they want in the way of legis- 
lation or administrative government 
they can get. We have ended that old 
practice — when anybody wanted any- 
thing from the legislature they came 
to somebody somewhere in a hotel 
office or barroom or a financier's office, 
they now go to the legislature itself. 
"We have restored the government to 
the people, and conscience and hope 
to the government. 



197 



Proportional Representation Department 

Edited by C. G. Hoag 
OFFICERS OF THE LEAGUE 

President, William Dudley Foulke 
Vice-Presidents, Prof. John R. Commons 
William S. U'Ren 
Mrs. Louis F. Post 
Honorary Vice-Presidents, The Rt. Hon. Earl Grey, Ex-Governor General of Canada 

The Rt. Hon. Lord Courtney of Penwith, England 

John H. Humphreys, Secretary of the Proportional Representation Society, London 

Count Goblet d'Alviella, Vice-President of the Senate, Belgium 

Professor E. J. Nanson, University of Melbourne, Australia 



Council 



Charles Frederick Adams.. New York 

Felix Adler New York 

Dr. J. F. Baldwin Ohio 

Charles A. Beard New York 

W. E. Boynton Ohio 

Harold S. Buttenheim. . . .New Jersey 

Richard S. Childs New York 

G. F. Chipman Manitoba 

Stoughton Cooley Illinois 

Alfred D. Cridgre Oregon 

Horace E. Deming New York 

Rev. Charles P. Dole. .Massachusetts 
George H. Duncan . . New Hampshire 

John E. Eastmond New York 

Charles W. Eliot Massachusetts 

John H. Flnley New York 

John H. Gabriel Colorado 

Dr. Lucius F. C. Garvin. .Rhode Island 

William H. Gove Massachusetts 

Dr. John R. Haynes California 

Paxton Hibben Indiana 

William Hoag Massachusetts 

Harold J. Howland New York 

Jeremiah W. Jenks New York 



Judge Ben. B. Lindsey .... Colorado 

Charles McCarthy Wisconsin 

Robert L. Owen Oklahoma 

Robert Treat Paine . . Massachusetts 

Eltweed Pomeroy Texas 

Jackson H. Ralston, Washington, D. C. 

Daniel S. Remsen New York 

Linton Satterthwaite .... New Jersey 
J. Henry Scattergood . . Pennsylvania 

J. S. Schapiro New York 

Henry R. Seager New York 

Isaac Sharpless Pennsylvania 

Albert Shaw New York 

Lieut. C. P. Shaw Virginia 

Charles P. Steinmetz New York 

Moorfleld Storey Massachusetts 

Dr. C. F. Taylor Pennsylvania 

Carl D. Thompson Illinois 

Robert Tyson Ontario 

DeLancey Verplanck New York 

John M. Vincent Maryland 

Thomas Raeburn White. Pennsylvania 
Dr. N. Wolverton . . British Columbia 

P. P. Woodward Alberta 

Charles Zeublin Massachusetts 



General Secretary-Treasurer. C. G. Hoag. Haverford. Pa. 
(June 15th till October 1st. Tamworth. N. H.) 

Secretary-Treasurer for Canada, Howard S. Ross, K. C, 326 Transportation Bldg., Montreal 



P. R. UNDER THE NEW DANISH CONSTITUTION 



Adopted for the Lower House 
Extended in the Upper House 

[Adapted from an article by Frederick Zeuthen of Copenhagen in the current 
issue of Representation] 



This spring Denmark has made a 
very important change in its consti- 
tution, in the first place introducing 
(or rather reintroducing) full democ- 
racy, and secondly, providing pro- 
portionality as a main principle in 
our electoral system. Under the 



former constitution (of 1866) the 
Folketing (House of Commons) was 
elected by majority elections in 114 
single-member constituencies, the 
electors being practically all men of 
thirty years of age. The Landsting 
(Upper House) consisted of 66 mem- 



198 



Equity 



bers, twelve nominated by the King 
and 54 elected indirectly by propor- 
tional representation by the An- 
drae system (the same as that in- 
vented by Hare two years after its 
practical introduction in Denmark in 
1855). 

The making of great changes in 
the constitution is an old tradition 
here in Denmark. During our vic- 
torious war of 1848-50 King Freder- 
ick VII gave the first free constitu- 
tion. After our defeat in 1864 and 
during the German-Austrian war of 
1866 we lost a large part of our 
democracy as the result of a com- 
promise between the great and the 
small agriculturists. That we have 
got back freedom and also taken a 
long step towards proportional repre- 
sentation during the world war, in 
spite of its seriousness and the in- 
terest it takes from internal ques- 
tions, is due partly to the national 
unison produced by the war, partly 
to the desire to be prepared after 
the war to do much ordinary work 
without losing time on merely polit- 
ical measures, and partly also to the 
fact that the present change had 
almost reached a final stage when 
the war broke out. 

The House of Commons 

Voters for the Folketing (House of 
Commons) include under the new 
constitution nearly all men and women 
of an age gradually decreasing from 
the thirty years formerly required to 
twenty-five. All voters are eligible 
for election to the House. Women's 
suffrage, used since 1909 for munic- 
ipalities, was passed with little op- 
position as well as little enthusiasm. 
The electorate will be increased from 
about 500,000 to about 1,200,000. 
In the new constitution it is enacted 
that the electoral law shall provide 
a method of election such as will 
give an equal representation, and 



shall further determine to what ex- 
tent P. R. is to be combined with the 
single-member constituencies. The 
electoral law in fact provides a sys- 
tem of election called "Proportional 
Representation in single-member 
constituencies.' 7 Over certain areas 
[the Islands and Jutland] elections 
are held by the customary majority 
method, but there are a number of 
additional seats which are to be al- 
lotted to candidates of those parties 
which have obtained fewer members 
than their proportional share. The 
advantages of that system are to pre- 
serve the personal and local election 
of candidates and at the same time 
to give at least some degree of 
proportionality to the parties. Com- 
pared with the simple list system of 
P. R., used in our municipal elections 
since 1909, it gives more personal 
contests and yet obtains a part of 
the proportionality to which we are 
accustomed in those elections. Com- 
pared with the single transferable 
vote [the Hare system] it is inferior 
in respect to both the personal and 
the proportional side of the election. 

To the 24 members of the Lower 
House for Copenhagen the electoral 
law applies the list system of P. R. 
The Upper House 

The change in the electorate for 
the Landsting (Upper House, or 
rather Second House), is without 
doubt the principal point in the 
whole reform. We are advancing 
from money and landed privileges to 
an equal vote for all men and women 
of thirty-five years of age. In the 
way of election we have here taken 
the step from partial to complete 
proportional representation. The elec- 
tions are now, as before, indirect. 
Formerly the election of electors was 
by majority; now the proportional 
list system is used. One elector is to 
be elected for every 1000 inhabitants 



Proportional Representation Department 



199 



inside the constituencies (or, in the 
capital, the voting-districts) for the 
Folketing. The method used is the 
old Andrae method modernised in the 
direction of the English single trans- 
ferable vote by adopting the Droop 
quota [the quota advocated by the 
American P. R. League for use with 
the Hare system] and the elimination 
of the candidate lowest on the poll. 

In addition to the fifty-four mem- 
bers elected in the way just describ- 
ed, eighteen are to be elected, also 
by P. R., by the members of the out- 
going House. These eighteen mem- 
bers are to replace the present twelve 
nominated for life by the King. The 
eighteen new members are elected by 
the previous Upper House with a 
view to securing a greater continuity 
and conservatism, especially in the 
first election under the new constitu- 
tion, so that the last Landsting under 
the old constitution should retain 
some influence. The fifty-four mem- 
bers of the Landsting are renewed 
in two parts, each sitting eight years. 
The eighteen members are to be 
elected (at alternate elections) all 
for the same period of eight years. 
The duration of the Folketing is four 
years. 



THE NEW YORK CONSTITU- 
TIONAL CONVENTION 
AND P. R. 



The Proportionalists of New York 
are supporting the following para- 
graph for the proposed new consti- 
tution: 

"The Legislature may provide that 
the election of the members of the 
Legislature, either or both houses, or 
of any Constitutional Convention 
herafter to be held, or of any elec- 
tive body or board of the State, or of 
any political subdivision thereof, 



shall be by any plan embodying the 
principle* known as proportional 
representation; and may provide for 
preferential voting for the election 
of any officeholder to be chosen by 
the electors of the whole State, or of 
any political subdivision thereof, 
anything in this Constitution to the 
contrary notwithstanding." 

The paragraph was introduced to 
the Constitutional Convention by the 
Hon. Seth Low "by request" It was 
referred to the Committee on Suf- 
frage, which granted a hearing on it 
June 2nd. Among the speakers at the 
hearing were Messrs. Seth Low, W. 
W. Wheatly (President of the N. Y. 
State P. R. League), Jeremiah W. 
Jenks (Professor of Government, N. 
Y. University), C. G. Hoag, H. B. 
Hammond, Robert H. Elder, John J. 
Murphy (Tenement House Commis- 
sion of N. Y.), John E. Eastmond, 
and a Socialist speaker. Several 
other supporters of the amendment 
were present. 

News from the Cities 

5"/. Louis. — Proportionalists in St. 
Louis are still at work on the prob- 
lem of adapting the list system of 
P. R. to the election of the city's 
twenty-eight aldermen in conformity 
with existing laws and habits. 

Ashtabula, Ohio, — The proposed 
amendment to the Ashtabula charter 
to provide for the election of the 
city's seven councilmen by the Hare 
system will be voted on at the polls 
on August 10th. The movement for 
P. R. in Ashtabula is ably led by 
Mr. W. E. Boynton, formerly presi- 
dent of the City Council, and vice- 
president of the Charter Commission. 

Los Angeles. — A new Board of 
Freeholders, to propose a new char- 
ter, has been elected in Los Angeles. 
It is thought that a majority of the 
board is in favor of P. R. Among 
the members are the well-known P. 



200 



Equity 



R. leaders, Geo. H. Dunlop, Dr. John 
R. Haynes, and Fred C. Wheeler. 
Mr. Wheeler was also recently re- 
elected to the City Council by a clear 
majority of 23,000 votes, leading the 
next highest man by 7,000. 



The Dupriez Dinner 

A dinner organized by the New 
York State P. R. League in honor 
of Monsieur L. Dupriez, Professor of 
Comparative Constitutional Law in 
the University of Louvain, Belgium, 
was held at the Park Avenue Hotel, 
New York, on May 22nd. Mr. W. W. 
Wheatly, President of the New York 
League, acted as toastmaster. 

After graceful opening remarks by 
the toastmaster, an address on 
stricken Belgium by Jeremiah W. 
Jenks, Professor of Government in 
New York University, and other ad- 
dresses, M. Dupriez responded el- 
oquently in French to the sympathetic 
references to his country and then 
read in English a speech on The Re- 
sults of Proportional Representation in 
Belgium. All who followed Professor 
Dupriez's )French response were 
thrilled by the burning patriotism, 
and all present were deeply impress- 
ed by the testimony on proportional 
representation in Belgium from so 
eminent an authority on comparative 
constitutional law. The English ad- 
dress should have great influence in 
the United States and Canada. It has 
already been printed nearly or quite 
in full by the New York Times, 
the Ottawa Evening Citizen, and the 
Chicago Public. 

Among the other speakers at the 
dinner were John J. Murphy (Tene- 
ment House Commissioner of New 
York), Professor Samuel McCune 
Lindsay of Columbia, Robert H. 
Elder, and C. G. Hoag. 



Direct Primaries from a Proportion- 
alist's Point of View 

We are sometimes asked our views 
on direct primaries. In regard to 
the details of primary legislation 
we do not care at present to offer 
any opinion, as we are not specialists 
on the subject. We do, however, 
have decided views in regard to the 
importance of primary laws relative- 
ly to the several fundamental re- 
forms for which Equity stands, and 
in regard to the relation between 
such laws and these other reforms. 

We believe that the direct primary 
laws which have come into operation 
in many states during the last few 
years are on the whole preferable to 
the Convention system they sup- 
planted. Certainly we see no evi- 
dence that the people wnat to go 
back to the old system. But, on the 
other hand, we do not believe that 
direct primaries, even in the most ap- 
proved form, will go to the root of 
our political difficulties. What is 
needed is a political mechanism that 
will make it possible for the peo- 
ple to control public affairs and to 
control them intelligently, and cer- 
tainly that great need is not met by 
direct primaries. Why this is so 
will be clear from a brief consider- 
ation of the nature of the difficulties. 

One of the chief difficulties in our 
public affairs is the "shiftability," so 
to speak, of responsibility. The re- 
sponsibility for what is done in state 
and local governments is shared by 
so many officials and bodies that the 
public does not know which em- 
ployee to "fire" when graft is ram- 
pant and inefficiency and waste ob- 
vious. This weakness was once digni- 
fied by the title of "check and 
balance system," but, as some wag 
once put it, the system has too often 
resulted "in the grafters getting the 
checks, the public paying the bal- 



Proportional Representation Department 



201 



ances." What is needed in govern- 
ment, as in private business, is the 
definite assumption of responsibility 
by somebody who is visible to the eye 
and can be got at. 

Another weakness of our old sys- 
tem of government is closely con- 
nected with the first one. I refer to 
our practice of electing at the polls 
officers whom the voters are not in a 
position to elect satisfactorily. You 
and I are usually in a position to 
choose intelligently between the sev- 
eral candidates for president, for 
governor, for congressman, and for 
a few other officers. But we are not 
in a position to choose intelligently 
between the candidates for a dozen 
or twenty minor offices. And the 
average voter is probably more at a 
disadvantage, when he is asked to 
make such choices, than you and I. 
The state and local offices that have 
to be filled by popular vote in Cook 
County, Illinois, according to the 
state constitution, will be found in 
the foot note below.* To require the 
voters to fill so many offices by elec- 
tion was supposed, when the system 
was instituted, to insure democracy. 
In fact, however, it makes democracy 
almost impossible. What it really 
establishes is the political system we 
have been having in the past 
throughout the country, which Pro- 
fessor Kales of Northwestern Uni- 
versity so aptly calls "politocracy;" 
that is, the rule of the professional 
politician. Of course it seems like 
democracy for us all to be allowed to 
elect all the officials in sight; but if 
you are to have the vote for each 
one of them, every other voter must 
have one too; and if most of the 
voters cannot possibly know enough 
about the candidates for so many 
positions to choose intelligently 
among them, the voters are really 
delivered by the system into the 



hands of the bosses; that is to say, 
the professional politicians who can 
patch together a "slate" that will 
really suit the active politicians and 
the interests, the only people who 
can afford to inform themselves 
thoroughly on the subject, and that 
the voters generally will helplessly 
put up with. 

The importance of these two weak- 
nesses of our old system of govern- 
ment, relatively to the weakness 
remedied by direct primaries, will be 
clear to every reader. Whether nomin- 
ations are made by conventions or by 
direct primaries, the voters can never 
really control their governments un- 
til they drop the practice of pretending 
to elect dozens of officials in respect 
to whom they cannot, in our populous 
modern communities, exercise a gen- 
uine and intelligent choice. For so 
long as they continue this prac- 
tice, the real control of public 
affairs must inevitably pass from 
the people to the professional pol- 
iticians who make the slates; that is, 
the "politocrats;" since the voters 
generally are practically as helpless 
in the primaries as they are in the 
final election. 

This raises, of course, the question: 
What officials ought to be (elected at 
the polls? The answer is, the mem- 
bers of the legislative body, that is, 
the members of the single legislative 
chamber. For a while most states 
will doubtless insist on electing the 
Governor also, but eventually it will 
be seen that in so far as the Gover- 
nor's powers are administrative, they 
should be in the hands of a profes- 
sional administrator chosen by the 
Legislature and holding office at its 
pleasure, and that in so far as his 
powers are legislative, they should be 
in the hands of the Legislature. 
Eventually the people will surely 
learn that the mechanism by which 



202 



Equity 



they can really control their govern- 
ment, and control it intelligently, 
consists primarily of the condensa- 
tion of the voters into their true 
representatives, the giving to those 
representatives of broad powers, in- 
cluding that of appointing the admin- 
istrators, and the holding of those 
representatives strictly accountable 
for their own acts and those of their 
creatures, the administrators. 

•Governor, lieutenant-governor, sec- 
retary of state, auditor, state treas- 
urer, superintendent of public instruc- 
tion, attorney-general, Judge of Su- 
preme Court, clerk of Supreme Court, 
15 county commissioners, judge of 
County Court, 14 judges of Circuit 
Court, 18 Judges of Superior Court, 
state's attorney, recorder, coroner, 
sheriff, county treasurer, county clerk, 
clerk of Circuit Court, clerk of Super- 
ior Court, and county superintendent 
of schools. 

This, it will be seen, is carrying 
the principle of the Short Ballot to 
its logical conclusion. That principle, 
as usually advocated, means the elec- 
tion only of officials few enough to 
be investigated, conspicuous enough 
to be interesting, and powerful 
enough to be held to account. The 
logical conclusion of the principle, 
then, is the election of only one of- 
ficial, and that one the most interest- 
ing and powerful of all. And that, 
in turn, means, except when the 
initiative or the referendum is to be 
exercised, the use of the ballot for 
no other purpose than the election of 
one representative — a representative 
rather than any other official because, 
where the representative body is 
elected by a reasonable system and 
given its due power, it is the voter's 
representative that interests him 
more than any other official; only one 
because obviously no voter has any 
right to take part in the election of 
more than one.* 

But what is the relation of this 



Short Ballot principle, as carried to 
its logical conclusion, to direct pri- 
maries? It is this: if the Short 
Ballot principle were carried out thus 
fully, the average voter would be in 
a position to exercise his full share 
of political power intelligently and 
effectively whether we had direct pri- 
maries or not; and if the Short Bal- 
lot principle is not carried out thus 
fully, the average voter must in- 
evitably be unable to exercise his 
share of political power with full 
intelligence >and effect whether we 
have direct primaries or not. The one 
thing in government that the average 
voter is in a position to do satisfac- 
torily is to vote for a representative. 
In voting for a representative he is 
only giving his support to certain 
general policies and interests, and 
that is the one thing in politics that 
he can do best. 

•If there are 250,000 voters in the 
■tate, and the representative body is 
to have twenty-five members, a voter 
exercises his full rights in the elec- 
tion of officers if his ballot and 9,999 
others are effective in electing one 
representative of a body that exer- 
cises all the powers of government 
not retained by the people. The sys- 
tem of election that permits all the 
voters to exercise their full rights 
thus is, of course, Proportional Repre- 
sentation. 

Relieve the voters of doing per- 
sonally in politics anything except 
what they can do to their own satis- 
faction and nobody else can do for 
them, namely taking part in the elec- 
tion of a representative and occasion- 
ally passing on great fundamental 
issues such as the adoption of a state 
constitution or city charter or any 
other issue that must be isolated for 
direct settlement at the polls. You 
will then find that the people can 
control the government effectively 
whether nominations are made by 
conventions or by primaries. 



Proportional Representation Department 



203 



One proviso, however, is necessary 
in connection with the statement just 
made: the means by which the voters 
express themselves on the men and 
measures they do vote on must be 
suitable and adequate. Even with 
the Short Ballot principle carried out 
to its logical conclusion, the end in 
view could not be attained with our 
present unreasonable, not to say ab- 
surd, system of electing representa- 
tives. For the people effectively to 
control their government, the repre- 
sentative body, which, as has been 
said, should be the governing body, 
should be elected by a system of un- 
animous constituencies, or in other 
words by Proportional Representa- 
tion. 

And here again we come to the 
bearing of primaries on the general 
problem of popular government. Any 
good system of unanimous constit- 
uencies or Proportional Representa- 
tion is carried out by means of a bal- 
lot which gives the voter an oppor- 
tunity to express his will so fully 
that preliminary elections for the 
nomination of party candidates are 
entirely unnecessary. 

Finally, so long as we elect at the 
polls other officials besides represen- 
tatives — and doubtless we shall elect 
a few others for many years to come 
— we ought to use for their election 
a system of preferential voting de- 
signed to secure the election of such 
officials by majorities instead of by 
mere pluralities. The majority-pref- 
erential ballot is the "adequate bal- 
lot" applied to election by majority, 
just as a good proportional ballot is 
the "adequate ballot" applied to the 
election of representatives by un- 
animous constituencies or quotas. 
And with an adequate ballot, applied 
to either purpose, primaries are quite 
unnecessary. 



Notes 



A very readable and convincing 
article in favor of proportional repre- 
sentation, entitled "Shall the Major- 
ity Rule," appeared in the Century 
for May. The author is Mr. N. I. 
Stone of New York. 



The new edition of Bliss's Encyclo- 
pedia of Social Reform will contain 
an article on proportional representa- 
tion by C. G. Hoag. 



Mr. John H. Humphreys, Secretary 
of the Proportional Representation 
Society (of London), is now visiting 
Australia and New Zealand in the 
interests of P. R. He expects to re- 
turn to England by way of Canada 
and the United States, where he will 
be warmly welcomed by proportion- 
alists. He will probably reach east- 
ern Canada about the latter part of 
September. 



U'Ren & Hess Att'ys. at Law. 

Portland, Oregon. 

May 19, 1915. 
Editors "Equity:" 

I have read the April number of 
"Equity," and I wish that every sup- 
porter of popular government could 
read the last two numbers. He will 
get the news of what is being done 
in "Equity" as it cannot be had any- 
where else. Besides this", he will get 
the plans and hopes of the leaders of 
the movement for future progress. I 
think it is not possible to supply more 
fully and effectively the material that 
the workers need, not only to advance 
the Cause, but for encouragement in 
their efforts by knowledge of success 
already attained. 

Sincerely yours, 

William S. U'Ren. 



204 



THE SHORT BALLOT DEPARTMENT. 



Edited by H. S. Gilbertson, executive secretary of The National Short Ballot Organization, 
383 Fourth Avenue, New York City. 
Officers of the Short Ballot Organization: President, Woodrow Wilson. Vice-Presidents, 
Winston Churchill; Horace E. Deming; Ben B. Lindsey; William S. U'Ren; William Allen White; 
Clinton Rogers Woodruff; John Mitchell, Mt. Vernon, N. Y. Advisory Board, Lawrence F. Abbott, 
Richard S. Childs, Henry Jones Ford, Norman Hapgood. Woodrow Wilson. Secretary and Treas- 
urer, Richard S. Childs. Executive Secretary, H. S. Gilbertson. 



The Short Ballot 

If the Short Ballot goes through 
in New York the fight will be half 
won in the country. The constitu- 
tional convention is naturally re- 
actionary but it is not altogether un- 
mindful of certain unmistakable 
signs that the people are in no mocd 
to set back the clock or to permit it 
to stand still. 

That the people of New York 
state will demand the Short Ballot 
as the irreducible minimum of pro- 
gress is indicated by a recent canvass 
of the editors of the state, which 
showed that fully eighty per cent, of 
them were heartily in favor of the 
principle. Of this number fully 75 
per cent, would have the principle 
translated into constitutional lan- 
guage in the form proposed by the 
Short Ballot Organization. The lead- 
ers of the convention will not be 
heedless of the meaning of this ex- 
pression. Whether or not they will 
exert a sufficiently powerful influence 
upon the lesser members is a question 
that remains to be settled. 

Opposition has arisen in the con- 
vention, led by ex-Senator Brackets, 
whose following includes Lemuel E. 
Quigg, a former Republican county 
chairman, and Ray B. Smith of Syra- 
cuse, a conspicuous member of the 
Republican machine in that city. But 
the deliberations of the convention 
have not yet proceeded to the point 
where their force can be measured. 
Their great argument will be that the 
Short Ballot leads to monarchy, and 
destroys democracy. The Short Bal- 
lot leaders reply that their proposed 



amendments, while increasing some- 
what the governor's power over ap- 
pointments, at the same time and in 
the same or even greater measure 
increase his responsibility. They 
add that the increased dignity and 
publicity which would attach to his 
office would in themselves be safe- 
guards or ''checks" of incalculable 
value. 

Powerful aid to the Short Ballot 
cause has come from ex-president 
William H. Taft, who addressed com- 
mittees of the convention recently. 
A few of the more significant of Mr. 
Taft's remarks are worth reprinting 
here: 

The government is enforcing the 
law. Why shouldn't it be under the 
man who is at the head and respon- 
sible for its enforcement? If you want 
a judge, why make a judge; but if you 
want a man who is to do things and 
enforce the law, when the man at the 
head is chained with the faithful exe- 
cution of the law, or with taking care 
that the laws* are faithfully executed, 
why shouldn't the man who conducts 
the prosecution and represents the 
state from the executive standpoint, 
be responsible to the man at the head 
of the state? * * * If you are going to 
have a lot of independent officers, who 
are running their own boats, paddling 
their own canoes, without respect to 
the head of the State, then, of course, 
you want a judicial officer to decide 
between them. But if you are running 
a government on the basis of the head 
man being responsible for what is 
done and for the work being done 
in the most effective way, then 
what you want is a counsel. When 
you consult a lawyer, you don"t con- 
sult a judge. You consult a man who 
is with you, seeking to help you in 
carrying out the lawful purposes that 



The Short Ballot Department 



205 



you have. Therefore he ought to be 
your appointee. You select him, if you 
go to a counsellor to help you in 
matters of law. Now, the chief exe- 
cutive is given an Attorney-General 
to advise and represent him in all 
legal matters. I don't see why he 
shouldn't be appointed. It would be 
most awkward if he was not, in Wash- 
ington, I can tell you that. 
****** 
I have no nightmare about this un- 
ion of the legislative and the execu- 
tive. I think it is not well to be dog- 
matic on such a proposition. I think 
one of the difficulties we find in our 
government is the rigid exclusion or 
the attempt to make a rigid separa- 
tion between the two, and I think 
there might be greater union, with 
greater efficiency in the matter of gov- 
ernment on the one hand, and greater 
economy. 

***:.-** 

Yes, I know you might have a bad 
Governor in it, and if you are working 
on the principle that you are going to 
have a bad Governor, and, therefore, 
you ought to shackle him and put 
handcuffs on him, then you won't get 
any government at all. I don't agree 
to the theory that because a bad man 
might get into a position of respon- 
sibility, where in order to do the peo- 
ple's work he has got to have the 
power, that with that power he might 
injure the people, therefore you ought 
to withhold the power — I don't agree 
to that at all. I think if you do, we 
will have an ineffective government. 
* * * I am opposed to an insurance 
so heavy against dishonesty that it in- 
terferes with efficiency. 

Dr. Frank T. Goodnow, President 
of Johns Hopkins University, and 
President A. Lawrence Lowell, of 
Harvard, and Dr. Frederick A. Cleve- 
land, chairman of the federal Effi- 
ciency and Economy Commission, 
have also appeared before commit- 
tees of the convention and expressed 
similar sentiments. 

The Short Ballot Organization, 
however, is not interested in effi- 
ciency so much as it is in democracy, 
and is therefore pointing out that a 



reduction in the number of elective 
offices and their co-ordination under a 
single responsible head actually con- 
solidates the people's power — it is 
"armed democracy." For this reason 
particularly it is insisted that the re- 
sponsibility of the governor over ap- 
pointments be unmistakable; that the 
governor be not required to submit 
his choices to ratification by the Sen- 
ate. It is insisted also that the list 
of appointive officers include the at- 
torney general and the comptroller, 
(at least so long as this officer exer- 
cises administrative as well as audit- 
ing functions). 

This independence of the auditor, 
by the way, is a matter of consider- 
able special interest. The comp- 
troller of New York State was 
originally instituted as a critic or 
"check" upon the state departments. 
But, as time has gone on, function 
after function has been turned over 
to him, in addition to those having to 
do with audit. The result is that 
millions of dollars are collected by 
the comptroller without the slightest 
check from any source — the comp- 
troller is his own auditor. 

To meet the need for independence 
and yet to avoid the inevitable ob- 
scurity which would attach to an 
elective auditor, it has been suggest- 
ed that the English practice be fol- 
lowed and that an auditor, having 
limited functions, be chosen by the 
legislature. This idea has been em- 
bodied in a brief amendment intro- 
duced by Mr. Franchot, the text of 
which follows: 

During the month of January next 
following the election of the governor, 
the legislature in joint session shall 
elect an auditor-general, who shall 
hold office for a term of four years 
and until his successor is qualified. 
The legislature may remove such of- 
ficer by giving him a copy of the 
charges against him and an opportun- 
ity to be heard publicly in his own de- 



206 



Equity 



fense. At such hearing the auditor- 
general may be represented by coun- 
sel. 

The auditor-general shall make Such 
examinations and reports of the fiscal 
accounts and affairs of the executive, 
administrative and judicial depart- 
ments of the State and of its civil di- 
visions* as the legislature shall direct. 
The legislature shall confer and im- 
pose upon the auditor-general only 
such other powers and duties as may 
be necessary to the exercise of the 
functions conferred upon him by this 
section. 

On the subject of the judiciary the 
New York Short Ballot Organization 
has introduced, through Mr. Henry 
L, •Stimson, an amendment which 
provides for the nomination of 
judges through a recommendation of 
the governor, in addition to such 
other methods of nomination as the 
legislature may enact. The text of 
Mr. Stimson's proposed amendment 
follows: 

Whenever a vacancy in the court 
of appeals or the supreme court is to 
be filled by election, it shall be the 
duty of the governor to make a nom- 
ination for such vacancy, and the 
name of the person so nominated shall 
be indicated on the ballot or other 
voting device used at the election by 
the words "Recommended by the Gov- 
ernor." The legislature shall pass 
laws providing for such nominations 
and for additional methods of judicial 
nomination not inconsistent with the 
foregoing, to effectuate the provisions 
of this section. No nomination to fill 
a vacancy in any judicial office shall 
be made by any partisan political or- 
ganization. 

Such an amendment, it is felt, 
would resolve the differences between 
those who are dissatisfied with the 
workings of the present elective 
judiciary but who are fearful of the 
results of the straight appointive 
plan. 



County Government 

County government reform in New 
York State has received a great im- 



petus from the action of the boards 
of supervisors in Westchester and 
Nassau counties, and from the form- 
ation of the new County Government 
Association. These three agencies 
have been working in co-operation 
and have come to a substantial 
agreement as to necessary constitu- 
tional changes by each adopting the 
following principles: 

First — That the Legislature should 
be required by the Constitution to pro- 
vide optional plans of county govern- 
ment, any one of which any county 
may adopt by a vote of the people. 

Second — That the Legislature should 
in such plans confer upon the Board 
of Supervisors or other governing 
body in such County such powers of 
local legislation as the Legislature 
may deem expedient. 

Third — That the Constitution should 
require that no such plan of govern- 
ment should be imposed on any county 
until approved by the electors thereof 
and that no amendment to any plan of 
government should affect any county 
which has previously adopted such 
plan unless such amendment is accept- 
ed by such county, or unless such 
amendment relates to some state 
function. 

Fourth— That the Constitution should 
require that all laws relating to the 
government of counties should be gen- 
eral both in terms and in effect, ex- 
cept that special or local laws relat- 
ing to such government may be pass- 
ed, but shall take effect only on ap- 
proval of the county affected. 

This indemnity of action is largely 
due to the fact that the County Gov- 
ernment Association has begun to 
bring together all the forces in the 
state who are dissatisfied with the 
present methods of administering 
county affairs. The gist of county 
government reform in New York is 
summed up in the demand for home 
rule, especially on the part of the 
urban and suburban counties like 
Erie, Westchester, Nassau and Onon- 
dago. 



The Short Ballot Department 



207 



Members of the official commissions 
to investigate new plans of govern- 
ment for Westchester and Nassau 
counties, have been active in the 
formation of the state Association, 
which bids fair to combine in its per- 
sonnel the practical and theoretical 
points of view. The officers of the 
organization are William M. Baldwin, 
of Garden City, President; Otho G. 
Cartwright, Director of the West- 
chester County Research Bureau, 
Secretary, with offices at 15 Court 
Street, White Plains, N. Y., and 
Oscar R. Houston, 64 Wall Street, 
New York, Counsel. These officers, 
together with the following, consti- 
tute the Executive Committee: 

Geo. S. Buck, Auditor of Erie Coun- 
ty. 

Wayne D. Heydecker, Secretary of 
the Chamber of Commerce of Fulton, 
N. Y. 

H. S. Gilbertson, Secretary of the 
New York Short Ballot Organization, 
N. Y. City. 

J. DeLancey Verplanck, of Dutchess 
County. 



William J. Wallin, formerly Cor- 
poration Counsel, Yonkers, N. Y. 

J. Mayhew Wainwright, ex-State 
Senator and now member of the Of- 
ficial County Commission in West- 
chester County. 



The City-Manager Plan 

As usual, we are able to chronicle 
significant events in the spread of 
the city manager plan. The most 
important of recent accessions is 
Wheeling, W. Va., which has recently 
adopted a new charter to go into 
effect two years hence. The Wheel- 
ing charter calls for a council elected 
in part by wards and in part at large 
— illustrating the flexibility of the 
plan as regards the representative 
feature. Newburgh, New York, 
adopted the plan in May, by a refer- 
endum under the Optional City Gov- 
ernment law. St. Augustine, Fla., 
adopted a special city manager char- 
ter on June 7. There are now 25 
"simon-pure" city manager charters 
in the United States. 



Chamber of Commerce Referendum 

The use of the Referendum, as a 
means of obtaining the consensus of 
opinion on important public questions 
among the 30,000 businessmen who 
comprise the membership of the 600 
chambers of commerce and trade 
throughout the country, is now fully 
established in the national Chamber 
of Commerce, with headquarters at 
Washington, which is the central or- 
ganization tying the various local 
bodies together. At this writing the 
ninth Referendum is being taken on 
the question of building a permanent 
merchant marine. The ballots have 
been sent out, containing four dis- 
tinct questions, on which members 
are asked to vote not later than June 
22. They are as follows: 

First, the Government undertaking 
the purchase, construction or charter 



of vessels for mercantile purposes, to- 
gether with their operation. 

Second, Government ownership of 
merchant vessels with private opera- 
tion. 

Third, subsidies from Government 
sufficient to offset the difference in 
cost of operation under American and 
foreign flags. 

Fourth, subventions from the Gov- 
ernment to establish regular mail and 
freight lines under the American flag 
to countries in which commercial in- 
terests of the United States are im- 
portant. 

Along with the ballot were sent 
out copies of the report of the na- 
tional Chamber's special committee 
on merchant marines. 

Elliot H. Goodwin, of Washington, 
D. C, is General Secretary of the 
national Chamber, and John H. 
Fahey, of Boston, is its President. 



Waxtii f t an> Gtynrnglj Wavlh $ nmn 

The constitutional convention which met in Philadelphia 
in 1787 made possible the peaceful and profitable cooperation 
which we now enjoy among the 48 states of our Union. 

In Europe, civilization now faces the greatest crisis in 
history. Among the nations there is no government. In the 
sphere of international relations, all is anarchy. The dip- 
lomats are powerless. Treaties and so-called "international 
laws" have become "scraps of paper. ," 

Under the plan of national sovereignties, great and 
powerful nations have been developed. But adequate regulation 
and control of international relations have been entirely neg- 
lected, resulting in the awful picture which we now behold — 
great nations destroying one another. 

Peace secured without remedying this basic error can be 
only temporary. The collision will come again, and not only 
the nations of Europe, but the nations of the entire world are as 
likely to be involved. 

The most important issue now facing humanity is the 
placing of international relations on so secure a basis that 
German commerce may use Atlantic ports, Russia Mediterra- 
nean ports, etc., as safely as Ohio uses our Atlantic ports. It 
can be done, safely aud profitably to all concerned. Then 
there will be no reason nor desire to fight. 

The problem is not new. It has been successfully worked 
out many times; not on so large a scale, but the principle is 
the same. 

The next step is to bring representatives of the different 
nations together, face to face, that they may see their mutual 
interests. That means an international constitutional conven- 
tion. 

It should meet immediately after the present war. Attend- 
ance at the Hague conferences indicates that an invitation 
from a responsible source will be generally accepted. 

Shall our Government send out this invitation? 

This act would advertise this vital plan to the entire world. 
The mere sitting of this convention would be the most powerful 
educative force along the line of international cooperation that 
has ever occurred. This duty is on the present generation at 
this crucial time. The nations must create an international 
authority, composed of all, above all, under which all may peace- 
fully develop, without danger to the autonomy and freedom of 
the smallest nation, just as our smallest states are as safe and 
as free as our largest states. 



Equity 

[Formerly Equity Series] 

Devoted to improved processes of self government, includingjthe 
Initiative and Referendum, the Recall, Proportional Representation, 
the Short Ballot, the Preferential Ballot, the One-chambered Legislative 
Body and whatever methods tend to increase the efficiency and democratic 
control of municipal, state, national and international government. 

isSSgig; Qu arterly Philadelphia, October 1915 

Contents 

EDITORIAL: Page 

New York's New Tool 211 

Against New Constitution 218 

Changing the Fundamental Law 224 

The Rule of the Ignorant 229 

Perversion of Amending Plans 232 

Minority Control of Congress 235 

THE INITIATIVE, REFERENDUM AND RECALL DEPARTMENT: 

$1,000 Reward to Mr. Taft 238 

Not Abolishing Legislatures 241 

Enemies of I. and R. Challenged 242 

Chamber of Commerce Referendum 243 

Stability Under Initiative 244 

Easier Impeachment and the Recall 246 

Referendum and War 247 

World Government vs. World War 264 

THE MARCH OF POPULAR GOVERN MR NT IN THE VARIOUS STATES 248 

Arkansas 248 Minnesota 251 South Carolina .. . 253 

California 248 Mississippi 252 South Dakota. ... 253 

Florida 249 Missouri 252 Tennessee 254 

Maine 250 New Jersey 253 Washington 254 

Maryland 250 New York 253 Canada 254 

Massachusetts.... 251 Ohio 253 

Book Reviews 237, 254 and 255 

PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION DEPARTMENT: 

C. G. Hoat, Editor 

Adoption of P. R. by Ashtabula, Ohio 256 

Professor Dupriet on P. R. for Cities 260 

Canadian Notes 261 

Mr. Humphrey's Visit 263 



Equity 

[Formerly Equity Series] 

Including the Direct Legislation Record, the Referendum News and the 

Proportional Representation Review. "" 

The purpose of this publication is to improve the machinery for self-government, to pro- 
mote honest and efficient government, and to place public affairs and public officials 
under direct final control of the electorate. The ideal is: That every American commun- 
ity — town, city and county — shall have the freest and simplest plan of self-government 
possible, resulting in the most efficient government possible: That every state shall have 
a short and simple constitution, fewer and better laws, and a more efficient government: 
That the National constitution shall be more easy to amend than at present, and that it 
■hall be possible for the people of the Nation to express themselves definitely concerning 
National issues whenever they may wish to do so: That the civilized governments of the 
world shall cooperate through a central organization to conserve life and property, re- 
placing the wanton destruction of war. 

Charles Fremont Taylor, Editor and Publisher 
EDWIN S. POTTER, Associate Editor 

1520 Chestnut St., Philadelphia, Pa. 



EDITORIAL COUNSELORS 



J. W. Sullivan, New York City George E. Chamberlain 

Founder of the Direct Legislation Record U. S. Senator from Oregon 

Eltweed Pomeroy, Donna, Texas J. H. Ralston, Washington, D. C. 

Former Editor of the Direct Legislation Record Delos F. Wilcox, New York 

Geo. H. Shibley, Washington, D. C. T _ _ _ 

Founder of the Referendum News L - F - c - Garvin 

W. S. U'Ren, Oregon, „ _. XT Ex-Governor of Rhode Wand 

Father of the "Oregon System" George W. Norris 

Senator Rob't. L. Owen _. _ _ U. S. Senator from Nebraska 

President of the National Popular Govern- MlLES Poindextbr 

ment League „ U. S. Senator from Washington 

Dr. Wm. Preston Hill, St. Louis, Mo. Morris Sheppard 

Father of the Initiative and Referendum in _ „ _ _ „ _ U. S. Senator from Texas 

Missouri Prof. Chas. Zueblin 
Roiert M. La Follette Publicist and Lecturer 

U.S. Senator from Wisconsin M. Clyde Kellby 
Judge Ben B. Lindsey, Denver, Colo. Member of Congress from Pennsylvania 

Dr. John Randolph Haynes William Allen White 

Los Angeles. Cal. Editor, Emporia, Kan.. Gauttt 

t, x,r ^ Father of the Recall in Cahfornia Frances Kellor 

Dr. Wm. Draper Lewis, Philadelphia, Pa. _.. , ,_ . XT i3 , - . 

Samuel Gompers Chief of Progressive National Service 

President of American Federation of Labor Carl Vrooman, Bloomington. 111. 

Moses E. Clapp Lieut. C. P. Shaw, Virginia 

Woodbridge N Ferrw Senat0r fr ° m MInnesota George H. Duncan, New Hampshire 

D ridge . erris Governof of MichIgan Jambs W. Bucelin, Grand Junction, Colo. 

George H. Hodges Father of Grand Junction System of Prefer- 

Ex-Governor of Kansas ential Voting. 



Entered at the Philadelphia Post Office as Second-class Matter 



Single copies, 15 cents; 50 cents per year; three years, $1. To facilitate the spread of the causes 
rtpresented by this magazine, four yearly subscriptions will be sent to different addresses for $1; 
s pedal rates for yearly subscriptions or single numbers for propaganda purposes supplied on applie- 
tien. 

Some of our enemies say that the people are not fit to initiate laws. The fact is 
that the laws that have been created by the Initiative compare favorably with the laws 
created by legislatures. There are no 'freak" laws among the initiated laws. As a 
rule they are simple, brief and to the point. They accomplish just what was intended 
by their sponsors. No initiated law has ever been declared unconstitutional. Un- 
fortunately these compliments cannot be applied to laws made by legislatures. No 
laws are so deliberately thought out and so carefully prepared as initiated laws. 



EDITORIAL 



VOL. XVII— No. 4 October, 1915 



NEW YORK'S NEW TOOL 



A Critical Examination of the Amend- 
ed Constitution to be Submitted to 
the Voters of the Empire State on 
Nov. 2nd, and Reasons Why It 
Should be Adopted in Spite of Its 
Serious Shortcomings. 

Important history was made at Al- 
bany, N. Y., between April 6th and 
September 10th, 1915. The constitu- 
tion of the most important state of 
our Union was revised for submission 
to the voters Nov. 2nd. 

The New York World says: "The 
convention has lengthened by 729 
lines a basic law already more than 
three times as long as the Constitu- 
tion of the United States." So the 
convention cannot claim brevity as a 
recommendation of its work. There 
is a general agreement among stu- 
dents of government that the ideal 
state constitution should be short. 
This ideal was disregarded by the 
Albany convention. 

And instead of reducing the legisla- 
ture to a single house of fewer mem- 
bers and increasing its powers and 
responsibilities, the old legislature of 
two houses is continued, its powers 
are curtailed, and its pay is increased] 

No method of control of legisla- 
tion is offered to the voters; and no 
popular control of officials; that is, 
no Initiative, Referendum or Recall. 
The methods of improvement in gov- 
ernment by popular control advocated 
by this magazine, and by all who be- 
lieve in really representative democ- 
racy, were entirely ignored. 

Work of a Unicameral Body 

The reason that state constitutions 
have been growing longer is because 



so much statutory matter is put into 
them. And here let us realize that, 
in the production of this statutory 
matter, state constitutional conven- 
tions are themselves unicameral legis- 
lative bodies. No division of respon- 
sibility between two houses. Their 
action is direct and responsible, and 
their product is vastly superior to the 
statutory product of bicameral legis- 
latures. There is no good reason 
why state legislatures should consist 
of two houses. What would have been 
thought of a proposition to make the 
late New York constitutional conven- 
tion bicameral? All constitutional 
conventions are unicameral, and they 
always do better work than bicameral 
legislatures. The worst feature of 
the government of New York State, 
as of every state, is the legislature. 
The convention failed to make needed 
changes in this important but defec- 
tive branch of state government. 

This magazine has long advocated 
short state constitutions and the 
elimination of statutory matter from 
them. But as long as legislatures 
are constituted as they now are, it is 
well to consider state constitutional 
conventions as occasional supplemen- 
tary unicameral legislatures, able to 
legislate with superior ability. This 
is not the true theory of state govern- 
ment, but it should continue until 
state legislatures are made uni- 
cameral, consisting of comparatively 
few, well selected and well paid mem- 
bers. Then ^state constitutions can 
be short and devoid of statutory mat- 
ter, giving the legislature very large 
powers, subject to popular control by 
means of the Initiative and Referen- 
dum. 

Administration Chief Aim 
But the attainment of improved gov- 
ernment may not be limited to a sin- 
gle means or method. We should not 
be so biggoted as to think that the 



212 



Equity 



way we believe in is the only way. 
Other* methods may have more merit 
than we think. The purpose of the 
Initiative and Referendum is to con- 
trol legislation. The New York con- 
vention worked chiefly from another 
point of view. It sought the im- 
provement of administration. From 
that point of view it constructed pro- 
posals which will doubtless lead to 
great improvements in state govern- 
ment. 

As an indication of the spirit pres- 
ent in the convention in opposition to 
popular control, Mr. Sheehan said in 
the debates on the final day: 

I marvelled when the gentleman from New 
York, Mr. Stimson, a few moments ago on the 
proposition preceding this one, declared that 
this body was a body of men who believe in 
representative government. Many of us do; 
I have no doubt Mr. Stimson does, and I do 
not impugn his good faith in the slightest. 
But the thought occurred to me then, whether 
he fully appreciated when he was uttering that 
single statement that for the first time ia the 
history of this constitutional government of 
ours, we have written in this proposed Con- 
stitution that which sounds the death-knell 
of representative government. I wondered 
if he appreciated, and I wonder if this great 
body of representative men appreciate that 
you have written squarely in this constitu- 
tion a provision that hereafter representative 
government shall not be the guide for the 
State, but that direct democracy voting on 
every city charter in the fifty-six cities of the 
State, is to supplant the technical place there- 
after to be made vacant by the retirement of 
representative government. I noticed, Mr. 
President, that the distinguished chairman of 
the committee, and the committee itself, 
refrained in this address from making any 
suggestion that we were now taking a momen- 
tous step toward the referendum in this State. 
. . Why don't we tell the people that we are 
going to give them this unheard of power? 
Doubtless you will get a lot of people whose 
hair is longer than the hair of the gentleman 
from Schenectady referred to by Mr. Smith, 
who will vote for this proposition. Let us 
make it attractive to them. Let us tell them 
exactly what it is. 



... I dare say that my friend, General Wicker- 
sham, will not rite In this presence and say he 
is in favor of the principle of the referendum. 



These remarks indicate that this 
extreme spirit did not prevail in the 
convention, but at the same time they 
record its presence. 

More significant is the following, 
from Mr. Root's final remarks as 
President of the convention: 

One other thing I wish to say and that is 
that similar evils to those that we have found in 
our state government have been found in the 
governments of many other states. People of 
those states have had recourse to an abandon- 
ment or a partial abandonment of representative 
government. They have had recourse to the 
initiative and referendum and the recall, the 
recall of officers and the recall of decisions. 
In this convention we have offered the most 
irrefutable, concrete argument against those 
nostrums and patent medicines in govern- 
ment and in favor of the preservation of 
that representative government which is the 
chief gift of our race to freedom, by under- 
taking to reform representative government, 
instead of abandoning it and to make it worthy 
of its great function for the preservation of 
liberty. 

We will not fly into a passion. We 
will not stubbornly controvert con- 
cerning what, in our opinion, should 
have been the action of the conven- 
tion in this regard. Let us stop to 
appreciate the truth of another brief 
quotation from Mr. Root's final re- 
marks: 

. . . Any one of us with the models which are 
available, could have produced in the solitude 
of his own office a more perfect and harmonious 
scheme of government. 

But no one, not even Mr. Root, had 
the privilege of thus producing a con- 
stitution for submission to the voters 
of a great state. However, we may 
fairly conclude that the work of the 
convention, in failing to provide the 
Initiative and Referendum for pop- 
ular control of legislation, and in fail- 
ing to provide the Recall for popular 
control of officials, and in seeking to 
attain better government in New 
York State entirely by reforming the 
administrative department, and with- 
out the possibility of popular control 
of any sort, fulfilled the wishes and 
plans of the leaders of the convention. 



Editorial 



21 



Let us consider the chief proposals 
of the convention, not in a spirit of 
prejudice, regret or revenge for what 
we think ought to have been done, 
but facing frankly the issues actually- 
submitted by the convention. Every 
voter in New York State may, on 
Nov. 2nd, cast his vote on the pro- 
posals submitted, and not on others 
that may be more prominent in his 
mind and dearer to his heart. 

The Shorter Ballot 
First, the shorter ballot — not the 
short ballot, but the long ballot made 
shorter. The state ballot is reduced 
from seven elective officers to four. 
The secretary of state, state treasur- 
er and the state engineer and sur- 
veyor are removed from the elective 
ballot, the first two becoming appoint- 
ive and the last abolished, his duties 
being merged in the new department 
of Public Works. The governor, 
lieutenant-governor, attorney gener- 
al and comptroller remain on the 
elective ballot. In addition to short- 
ening the elective state ballot, the 
powers of the governor are greatly 
increased. The convention found that 
the administrative functions of the 
state are divided among 150 depart- 
ments, bureaus, commissions, boards, 
etc., and it concentrated all these into 
17 departments, making it the duty of 
the governor to appoint the heads of 
all these departments except that of 
Law (attorney general) and of 
Finance (comptroller), which remain 
elective, and that of Education, which 
continues to be appointed by the 
regents of the university. The ap- 
pointments for four of these depart- 
ments require confirmation by the 
senate, because they have legislative 
as well as administrative functions. 
These departments are: Labor and 
Industry; Public Utilities; Civil Ser- 
vice; Conservation. The heads of all 
the other departments, viz: Accounts, 



Treasury, Taxation, State, Public 
Works, Health, Agriculture, Char- 
ities and Corrections, Banking, Insur- 
ance, are to be appointed by the gov- 
ernor without confirmation by the 
senate, and the powers of removal by 
the governor are very large. 

This extensive reconstruction of an 
administrative department that had 
grown by devious paths without rule 
or reason until there were extensive 
duplications, conflicts of duties and 
authority, etc., is very commendable. 
Academically we can say that this 
work is not complete. The technical 
offices, Law and Finance, with exten- 
sive patronage, are still to be filled 
by popular election, thus giving the 
state three executives instead of one, 
the governor. True. But the pres- 
ent condition is incomparably worse 
than the new proposal. And the 
question to be decided by the voter3 
of New York is, shall the present 
condition be continued indefinitely, or 
shall the new proposal be adopted? 
Emphatically this magazine says to 
the voters of New York, if you can't 
get the short ballot, by all means take 
the shorter ballot offered to you on 
Nov. 2nd, and hope, by separate 
amendment, to make the ballot still 
shorter in the next few years. 

The Budget Plan a Big Advance 

The next most important proposal 
of the convention concerning the ad- 
ministrative department is the budget 
plan of making up appropriations. 
The heads of departments must sub- 
mit to the governor careful estimates 
of the financial needs for the ensuing 
year, and from these the governor 
makes up the annual budget, which 
he submits to the legislature* The 
legislature may decrease items, but it 
may not increase any items or the 
sum total. The governor and the 
heads of the departments may ap- 



214 



Equity 



pear before the legislature to be 
heard respecting the budget. 

This proposal is revolutionary to 
the ideas and the practices of the 
trading politicians and the grafters. 
It will do away with "log rolling" in 
the legislature, in the making up of 
appropriations. Instead of every 
representative striving to get as 
much as possible for his own district, 
and agreeing to vote for other . ques- 
tionable items in the appropriation 
bill in order to get support for his 
own, the items are made up by the 
governor' with the aid of the depart- 
ments, and they must be defended in 
the legislature by the governor and 
the heads of departments. The legis- 
lature cannot increase items; it can 
only decrease. This rational plan is 
used in every civilized country except 
our own. If put into practice in the 
State of New York, it will attract the 
attention of the entire country, and 
its spread to other states and to the 
national government will be certain, 
and perhaps rapid. 

Short Term of Governor Bad 
These two proposals are alone suffi- 
cient to make the Albany convention 
memorable. Academically we can 
find flaws in the first one; but prac- 
tically we must admit that it is a 
distinct improvement on the present 
plan of government in New York 
State and in all our states. The 
greatest defect is the short term of 
the governor — only two years. Half 
our states give the governor' a four- 
year term. Why could not New York 
trust its governor for four years? 
IThey said, because, with such great 
powers, the people should control. 
They cling to the old plan of fre- 
quent elections in order to secure 
popular control. The Recall is the 
best means of popular control of 
officials. The office of governor of 
New York, under the new constitu- 



tion, will be a big job. It will call 
for a big man. No man big enough 
to suit the place will wish to accept 
it for the short term of two years. 
There can be no guarantee of re- 
election, however satisfactory his 
services may be. The short term in- 
jures the place as an attraction to the 
right kind of men. Such men want an 
opportunity for a career. Fear of 
abuse of great powers and opportun- 
ities was the reason for making the 
term two years. Remove the fear of 
abuse and the term could and would 
have been made longer. That con- 
vention could not see, would net see, 
that a reasonable provision for the 
popular Recall would have removed 
danger of abuse, would have kept 
constantly before the mind of the in- 
cumbent his responsibility to the elec- 
torate, and would have opened up this 
great office, made greater than ever, 
to the possible career of great 
men. With the Recall, the term 
could safely be made, not only four 
years, but seven or even ten years. 
This would invite men who are seek- 
ing a great and honorable career. 

The short term for governor and 
popular election of the attorney gen- 
eral and the comptroller are the de- 
fects of the first proposal; but even 
with these defects, this proposal is a 
vast improvement upon the present 
plan. Why not accept this long step 
in the right direction, and work for 
the rest with the hope of realizing it 
in the near future? 

Advance Toward Home Rule 
Another proposal, not secondary in 
importance but less original than the 
two above noted, is the large measure 
of home rule granted to municipalities 
and counties. It is not necessary to 
discuss this subject in these pages, 
except to note in passing that not 
only is local government throughout 
the state given great opportunities, 



Editorial 



215 



but the legislature is largely relieved 
of the duty and the privilege of local 
legislation. 

Workmen Benefitted 

The one other proposal that we 
wish to note with special emphasis is 
the extension of legislative authority 
to include occupational diseases in 
workmen's compensation acts. This is 
new territory in the legislative field 
in this country, and if its importance 
to certain classes of industrial work- 
ers is properly realized, the voters of 
New York will welcome the opportun- 
ity to vote for it on Nov. 2nd. In 
this section the convention distin- 
guished itself, and set a precedent for 
other states to follow. If organized 
labor was disappointed in not getting 
some things it wanted, it should find 
here ample justification for support- 
ing the new constitution. 

Many other reasons for supporting 
the new constitution could be given, 
such as the revised judiciary article, 
establishing a shorter and cheaper 
course to justice; the substitution of 
serial bonds for sinking fund bonds 
in state indebtedness, etc. 

Now what are the reasons urged 
for the defeat of the new constitu- 
tion? We will consider this in relation 
to the main proposition only, as the 
Apportionment and Taxation amend- 
ments will be submitted separately, 
and will not be discussed here. 

Composition of Convention 
In the first place, the convention 
was made up overwhelmingly of re- 
actionaries, 130 of the 168 delegates 
being lawyers, many of whom were 
or had been retained professionally 
by "the interests." While admitting 
the truth of this charge, let us con- 
sider the ethics of the legal profes- 
sion, the chief principle of which is 
to be true to clients. The people of 
New York State were the clients of 



the lawyers in this convention; and 
the editor of this magazine believes 
that this overshadowing principle in 
legal ethics influenced the actions of 
at least a great majority, if not all, 
the lawyers there retained. True, 
their ideas may have been, and 
doubtless were, colored by their pre- 
vious associations, and their sym- 
pathies may have lingered there, al- 
so. But we are all influenced by as- 
sociations, both past and present. 
Some so-called "reformers" too read- 
ily impugn the motives of the mem- 
bers of this great and noble profes- 
sion. This magazine does not sym- 
pathize with such unjustifiable at- 
tacks. Our legal friends may be 
very conservative — even reactionary. 
But it is up to us to convince them 
rather than to malign them. It is 
also our duty to consider the merits 
of the convention entirely aside from 
its personnel, and its work aside from 
our own preconceived notions as to 
what it should have done. "There are 
more things in heaven and earth, 
Horatio, than are dreamt of in your 
philosophy." 

The next criticism is that the dele- 
gates were elected on a political 
basis, making the convention a polit- 
ical body, instead of a nonpartisan 
body, as a constitutional convention 
should be. Certain strong elements 
in the state were entirely without 
representation, For example, the 
Progressives, who cast 400,000 votes 
in 1912, had not a single delegate; nor 
was there a single Socialist delegate, 
and organized labor was only scantily 
represented. This is all true. But 
the following paragraph from the 
closing remarks of President Root is 
a convincing reply to partisan 
charges: 

And another result of this course of conduct 
has been that the thirty-three measures adopted 
by the Convention have been adopted by these 
astonishing votes: Twelve of the -measures 



316 



Equity 



Vefe adopted unanimously; twelve were adopted 
"by majorities of more than ten to one; of the 
-Remaining nine, two were adopted by major- 
ities of more than seven to one; two by major- 
ities of more than four to one; two by majorities 
•of more than three to one; and three by major- 
ities of more than two to one. That, in an 
■assemblage composed of two different and per- 
ennially conflicting parties, was the result of 
common patriotic contributions by the mem- 
bers of both parties towards the perfection of 
measures in a Convention which was doing its 
work with a sense of the dignity of the people 
it represented, and not for party advantage. 

Objections Are Negative 
Some basic objections, particularly 
from the point of view of those who 
believe in the principles advocated by 
this magazine, are: 

The legislature not reformed. 
Popular control of legislation 
(the Initiative and Referendum) 
and of officials (the Recall) not 
granted. 

The short ballot reform not com- 
plete. 

The home rule reform not com- 
plete. 

But all these objections are nega- 
tive. Should a hungry man refuse 
all food because his favorite dishes 
are not offered? 

Among the strongest editorials on 
the negative side are those in the 
New York Evening Mail. The chief 
complaint is that the governor is not 
properly selected nor for a sufficient 
length of term. It is true that private 
corporations, the German cities, and 
the commission-manager cities in this 
country have made it evident that the 
better plan of choosing an adminis- 
trative officer is by a small board of 
elected men rather than by popular 
vote. While agreeing, we wish to 
call attention to these two facts; our 
presidents, chosen by popular vote, 
have usually been good selections; 
and railroad presidents, chosen by 
boards of directors, have not been 
conspicuously honest, efficient, or 
true to. the interests of the public 



or of the stockholders, if we are to 
judge by such examples as the New 
Haven, the Rock Island, and many 
others that might be mentioned. While 
Editor McClure voices a great truth 
in government, yet we all learn 
sooner of later that, concerning such 
matters, it is not well to be "too wise 
in our own conceit." 

Our most serious regret is that the 
convention allowed the legislature to 
stand as it is, with its responsibility 
divided and its efficiency crippled by 
its consisting of two houses, its num- 
erous membership, which is always 
largely of inexperienced first-termers, 
its district membership, etc.; and 
that absolutely no provision was 
made for popular control of either 
legislation or officials. But possibly 
it may be better not to try to do too 
much at one time. 

Mr. Root's Challenge 
Mr. Root challenges the Initiative, 
Referendum and Recall with his plan. 
We accept the challenge by giving 
him cooperation for his plan, and 
challenge him to cooperation for the 
Initiative, Referendum and Recall as 
soon as his plan is established. His 
plan will favor executive efficiency, 
but it will concentrate the power of 
the machine. The short ballot advo- 
cates claim that the conspicuousness 
of the few elected officials will be 
sufficiwit to prevent abuse of concen- 
trated power. We know that the 
Initiative, Referendum and Recall 
will prevent abuse by establishing 
popular control. Government in the 
Initiative, Referendum and Recall 
states is not more efficient than in 
other states because the Initiative, 
Referendum and Recall do not in- 
sure efficiency of administration. 
They are not intended for that pur- 
pose. They establish popular control, 
and thus give the people machinery 
by which they can prevent corruption 



Editorial 



217 



and combat party machines. These 
things have been done in the Initia- 
tive, Referendum and Recall states, 
and Mr. Root and his friends will find 
that these things will be needed more 
than ever in New York when the 
efficiency plan is introduced. The 
efficiency plan and the control plan 
are both important. They should, 
and must finally, be combined. 
"Efficiencyists" should not oppose 
popular control, and "controlists" 
should not oppose efficiency and the 
concentration necessary for efficiency. 
This magazine is working for both, 
because both are necessary to ideal 
state government. We will take eith- 
er wherever the opportunity offers, 
and then work for the other to follow. 

Concerning the state-wide Recall, 
which is particularly important in 
connection with the efficiency plan, it 
exists in the constitutions of ten 
states and has not yet been called 
into use in any one of them. So it 
cannot be so very dangerous as some 
of the New York delegates think; 
and they should readily see its impor- 
tance. The next step that New York 
should take is to lengthen the term 
of her governor and adopt the Recall. 

A very important consideration is, 
that under the new constitution, there 
would be great activity in the munic- 
ipalities all over the state for the re- 
vision of charters and the adoption 
of a modern form of local govern- 
ment, which would probably be the 
commission-manager plan, which in- 
volves the short ballot in the popular 
election of a small commission. All 
local authority is placed in the com- 
mission, which is empowered to em- 
ploy an executive, responsible to the 
commission. Thus the elected body 
becomes the legislative body, and it 
carefully chooses an expert to whom 
it delegates its administrative func- 
tions. This plan for efficiency, com- 



pleted by the Initiative, Referendum 
and Recall for safety, is at present 
the "last word" on municipal govern- 
ment. Experience in nearly 400 
municipalities has shown that the 
Initiative, Referendum and Recall are 
not abused, and that they are useful 
and important, even when not called 
into use. They are destined to become 
foundation stones in every municipal 
charter and in every state constitu- 
tion. 

Propositions Should be Adopted 

To give the municipalities of New 
York State this opportunity to perfect 
their local government would alone be 
worth all that the convention has cost 
in money, time and labor. But when 
we add to this the shorter ballot, the 
executive budget, the extensive re- 
forms in the judiciary department, 
indemnity for occupational diseases, 
and other betterments of the present 
constitution, we do not see how any 
voter who has the welfare of the peo- 
ple of New York State at heart can 
vote against the amended and im- 
proved constitution offered by the 
convention to the voters of the state. 
By voting for it the voters will prove 
themselves able to judge soundly, 
and demonstrate their worthiness to 
be trusted to vote directly upon seri- 
ous and important matters. Do not 
be misled by the claim that in the 
shorter ballot you are sacrificing a 
portion of your democracy. It is a 
higher and purer democracy to select 
intelligently a few important and re- 
sponsible officers, than to blindly fol- 
low the party "leader" (they prefer 
this term to "boss") and vote for 
many officers of small and conflicting 
responsibilities by a single mark in 
a party square. 

The claim of the New York World, 
that the new constitution takes the 
government farther away from the 
people is not well founded. Bring- 



218 



Equity 



ing the few elected officers out into 
the public light of concentrated re- 
sponsibility which they cannot shift, 
brings the government nearer to the 
power of the people than to continue 
the old maze of conflicting respon- 
sibilities in which any rascal may 
hide. 



AGAINST NEW CONSTITUTION 



An Able Letter from the Editor of 
the Batavia, N. Y. Times, Urging 
Its Defeat and a Reply by the 
Editor of Equity. 

The constitution of the State of 
New York was established in order to 
secure to the people the blessings of 
freedom. The present constitution 
expresses only this one idea, in its 
preamble. The proposed amended 
constitution makes no change in this 
preamble. In order for any people to 
be what they should be and for cit- 
izens to possess what they ought to 
possess, freedom is the prime and 
fundamental necessity. The pre- 
amble to the constitution is therefore 
appropriate. Constitutions are re- 
vised from time to time because this 
is a progressive age and our idea of 
freedom is a constantly changing one, 
as our ideal of citizenship becomes 
more broad, more high, and more 
perfect. 

In considering, therefore, the amend- 
ed constitution proposed for New 
York state, the fundamental ques- 
tion is whether, under its provisions, 
the people will enjoy a greater or a 
less degree of freedom than they now 
possess. Government is a contrivance 
to provide for human needs. Will the 
new constitution enable the people 
to better supply themselves with the 
necessities of existence — food, cloth- 
ing and shelter, and will it give 
them greater opportunities for educa- 



tion and self development? I be- 
lieve it will not, and while it is, in 
some respects, an improvement over 
the present constitution, in deciding 
whether it should be accepted or re- 
jected at the polls, one must remem- 
ber that if accepted, it is likely to 
stand with comparatively few changes 
for many years, while if it is defeat- 
ed, we are likely to have another 
constitutional convention very soon. 
Thaddeus Stevens said: "No gov- 
ernment can be free that does not 
allow all its citizens to participate 
in the formation and execution of her 
laws. Every other government is a 
despotism." 

No Popular Control Permitted 
One fundamental defect of the new 
constitution is that it makes no pro- 
vision whatever to bring government 
closer to the people, and to place it 
more directly and more perfectly un- 
der popular control through the 
Initiative, the Referendum, the Re- 
call, and Proportional Representa- 
tion. It is believed by some that the 
Short Ballot amendments constitute 
a step in this direction. Had these 
amendments been conceived and 
framed with an honest desire to pro- 
mote popular control of governmental 
affairs, they would have been a step 
in the right direction. 

The fundamental idea of the Short 
Ballot is to limit the elective offices 
to those of governor and lieut-gover- 
nor, to give large powers of appoint- 
ing to the governor: to give him, in 
fact, the power of appointing the 
heads of all departments, to relieve 
him of the pernicious requirement of 
senate confirmation; thus placing 
great power in his hands, but with a 
corresponding great responsibility to 
the people. As direct primaries re- 
quire, as a concomitant, the Short 
Ballot, so does the Short Ballot also 
require the Recall to guard ag 



Editorial 



219 



the dangers of an executive, who 
might prove arbitrary and despotic 
instead of a true servant of the peo- 
ple. 

If the character of the government 
in all its departments, is to depend 
upon the governor, and the high 
character, integrity and ability of his 
appointees, their terms of office 
should parallel his own. 

Senate to Confirm Appointments 

The Short Ballot amendments of 
the new constitution leave four in- 
stead of two elective offices. The 
governor, lieutenant governor, comp- 
troller and attorney general will be 
elected as under the old constitution. 
The number of elective offices are on- 
ly reduced from seven to four. The 
secretary of state and treasurer are 
to be appointed by the governor, and 
no senate confirmation is required. The 
other elective office, state engineer 
and surveyor is to be abolished. The 
vicious features of the Short Ballot 
amendments, and which nullify the 
whole spirit of the Short Ballot re- 
form, are those which require senate 
confirmation on all the most im- 
portant appointments of the governor, 
and make their terms of office ex- 
tend far beyond his term of office. 

While there are eleven unimportant 
administrative officials, whom the 
governor can appoint outright, with- 
out senate confirmation, there are 
twenty-seven highly important of- 
ficials for whom he must obtain sen- 
ate confirmation. 

The new conservation commission 
will consist of nine members. Their 
term of office is nine years, one term 
expiring each year. Senate confirma- 
tion is necessary. Can the governor, 
whose term of office is two years, be 
responsible for the conservation pol- 
icy of the state under such condi- 
tions ? 



The new constitution provides for 
two public service commissions, one 
for New York City and one for the 
rest of the state, and continues the 
present commissioners in office until 
their terms expire, years beyond the 
term of the present governor, and 
some beyond the term of the next 
governor. These offices require sen- 
ate confirmation. Can any future 
governor be responsible for the ad- 
ministration of the two public ser- 
vice commissions when less than a 
majority are his appointees, and 
when his appointees have not been 
the best men he could find for the 
places, but only the best men a boss- 
ruled senate would accept? 

The Industrial Commission 
The new constitution provides for 
an industrial commission, as head of 
the department of labor and industry, 
but the commissioners must be ap- 
pointed by the governor by and with 
the advice and consent of the senate. 
The commissioners appointed by the 
present governor will hold over dur- 
ing the term of his successor unless 
removed. Does this give the next gov- 
ernor of the state such power and re- 
sponsibility for the labor department 
as is demanded by the true spirit of 
the Short Ballot reform? 

The powers and duties of the con- 
servation department, the public 
utilities department and the labor de- 
partment are greater, beyond com- 
parison, than all the other depart- 
ments of the state combined. If the 
great accumulators of wealth and 
the corporations seeking special priv- 
ileges at the expense of the people 
can control these departments, they 
care little who holds the office of state 
treasurer or secretary of state or 
any of the other offices which the 
governor may fill without the senate's 
confirmation, and whose functions are 
mainly clerical. 



220 



Equity 



Those who are defending the Short 
Ballot amendments boast that they 
established 17 state departments for 
carrying on the civil, executive, and 
administrative functions of the state, 
"which are now scattered through 150 
bureaus, departments, commissions, 
boards, officers and other agencies." 
They leave to the legislature, how- 
ever, the defining of the powers and 
duties of most of the departments, 
but the legislature is prohibited from 
creating any new departments or 
abolishing any that may prove use- 
less, which seems an indefensible re- 
straint of representative government. 

Probably the government of New 
York state is needlessly complex, and 
no doubt there are useless offices 
which should be abolished. However, 
those who are most familiar with the 
government of the state know that 
the functions of the government now 
are mainly carried on by about twen- 
ty departments. There are certain 
boards and commissions whose ex- 
istence is purely nominal, for the 
legislature has made no appropriation 
for them for several years; as for 
instance, the commission on new 
prisons.. There are several boards, 
members of which serve without com- 
pensation, as for instance, the state 
board of geographic names. Then 
there are the boards of trustees, or 
directors, having charge of education- 
al, and reformatory institutions, who 
serve without remuneration, but who 
generally reside in the vicinity of the 
school or institution with which they 
are connected. There can be no ad- 
vantage to the state in abolishing 
these boards or commissions and 
transferring their duties to some 
state department. 

Evolution Implies Complexity 
In short, the 150 bureaus, depart- 
ments, commissions, boards, officers 
and other agencies are, to a very 



large extent, the legitimate result of 
the natural and proper evolution of 
the state government. An amoeba is 
a very simple animal, and a man is 
a very complex one; and because the 
latter is more complex and highly 
organized, he can do many things 
that the more simple animals can- 
not do. The most efficient body poli- 
tic is by no means the most simple. 
The arbitrary merging of 150 bur- 
eaus, departments, etc., at one fell 
swoop into 17 departments is likely 
to produce a confusion and a dis- 
organization of the functions of the 
state that will in no degree promote 
good government. 

The provisions of the new constitu- 
tion with regard to taxation are alto- 
gether reactionary, and evidently in- 
tended to prevent any future concen- 
tration of taxation upon land values. 
Should the new constitution be 
adopted, no single tax legislation 
could be enacted except by a two- 
thirds vote of the legislature. Those 
who opposed this amendment in the 
convention, declared that it was in- 
tended to permit the introduction of 
a compulsory listing scheme for the 
taxation of all personal property, un- 
der the supervision of the state, thus 
abolishing in a degree, the local con- 
trol of assessments. 

Memorial of Organized Labor 

The New York State Federation of 
Labor presented a memorial to the 
convention, which on the whole was 
most creditable to organized labor. It 
asked for twenty-four amendments to 
secure, among others, the following 
reforms: the Initiative, the Referen- 
dum, the Recall; the election of all 
judges; the abolition of party em- 
blems from ballots; the election of 
judges separately, at a time when no 
other officers are chosen; trial by jury 
of all criminal prosecutions, including 
cases of contempt of court; the elec- 



Editorial 



221 



tion of state senators annually; the 
election of delegates to a constitu- 
tional convention separately, when no 
other state officials are chosen; the 
abolition of capital punishment; the 
eight-hour day for all state employes; 
the separation of the labor depart- 
ment from the workmen's compensa- 
tion department; authorizing the 
state to insure against sickness, old 
age and unemployment, as well as 
against accidents; providing that any 
act which one person may legally do 
may be done by two or more in con- 
cert, and furthermore that the con- 
stitution declare that the labor of a 
human being is "not a commodity." 

The convention refused favorable 
action on all these propositions. 

The memorial asked for woman 
suffrage, for an authorization of the 
state to regulate manufacturing in 
tenement houses, for an authorization 
of the extension of the workmen's 
compensation act to include occupa- 
tional diseases; that the salaries of 
the members of the legislature should 
be increased; and that the power of 
the governor to accelerate legislation 
by emergency messages should be 
curtailed. 

The convention took no action with 
regard to woman suffrage, but did 
adopt for submission to the voters 
the other requests enumerated. The 
woman suffrage amendment, however, 
will be submitted in accordance with 
previous legislative action. 

Granted Mere Palliatives 

With regard to labor's memorial, 
it will be seen that the convention 
refused favorable action on funda- 
mental reforms, and granted favor- 
able action on mere palliatives. 

George W. Wickersham in defend- 
ing the work of the convention says 
that it considered 800 requested 
amendments, and yet concluded to 
submit to the people only 33, and 



these 33 amendments are arranged so 
that the people can vote on only two 
of them separately and intelligently, 
and in a reasonable manner. The 
amendment relating to taxation and 
assessments is to be voted on by 
itself. The amendment relating to 
the legislative apportionment is to 
be voted on by itself. All the 
other amendments must be voted 
upon en masse. Certainly not a 
very high regard is shown for the 
intelligence of the electors by this 
arrangement. 

Voting on Amendments "En Masse 1 ' 

One delegate to the convention 
said: 

"I greatly regret that the convert 
tion did not determine to submit a 
greater number of the new proposals 
as separate questions, so that the 
voter who approves the best part of 
the convention's work might cast his 
ballot for those things without sacri- 
ficing earnest and honest convictions 
in opposition to other proposals. Why 
should the convention compel a voter 
to reject what he considers good, in 
order to vote against that which he 
believes to be bad, or to accept that 
which he abhors, in order to cast his 
ballot for a reform which he feels 
will innure to the lasting benefit of 
the state?" 

Thus the convention which treated 
the proposed amendment for the per- 
missive Initiative and Referendum 
with scant courtesy, sought to make 
ridiculous the compulsory Referen- 
dum which the adoption of a consti- 
tution requires. 

In a circular issued by the distin- 
guished committee formed to advo- 
cate the adoption of the constitution, 
it is said that the revised constitution 
"offers the opportunity to this state 
to lead in the sane and orderly de- 
velopment of state government with- 
out rash experiment, and to cure the 



222 



Equity 



confusion, waste and irresponsibility, 
which we know to exist, by the re- 
form rather than by the abandonment 
of representative government." 

No doubt these gentlemen, like 
former President Taft, regard those 
devices calculated to place govern- 
ment close to the people, to keep it 
there, and to make it truly repre- 
sentative, as "the abandonment of 
representative government." 

It should be noticed in this brief 
statement by the committee for the 
adoption by the constitution, that the 
only evils they seek to cure or pre- 
tend to cure are "confusion, waste, 
and irresponsibility." 

For the Satisfied Classes 

There is no evidence in the amend- 
ed constitution itself, or in the de- 
bates of the convention, that the 
members were men imbued with the 
modern spirit of revolt against those 
unjust social, political and economic 
conditions, largely the result of evil 
laws, which produce misery, vice, low 
wages and starvation for some, while 
others have swollen and unearned 
fortunes. There is no evidence that 
the members of the convention 
thought seriously of the problems of 
poverty and unemployment or of the 
evils which flow from monopoly and 
privilege. The new constitution is 
the product mainly of men who are 
thoroughly satisfied with most things 
as they are. They have not aimed to 
frame a basic law that will bring 
government closer to the people and 
equalize opportunities for all. 

They have given us a constitution 
that puts emphasis on property rights 
rather than on human rights, and is 
out of sympathy with the spirit of 
the times and the demands of present- 
day democracy. 

Chester C. Platt. 

Batavia, N. Y. 
* * * 

[I find myself in substantial agree- 



ment with Mr. Platt. His objections 
are well stated. His vision is keen. 
But at the same time I sincerely hope 
that the amendments will be adopted. 
The able men who led the convention 
think that they can perfect govern- 
ment through the administrative side. 
That side of the government of New 
York State certainly needs improve- 
ment, and it would be a great misfor- 
tune for this opportunity for im- 
provement to be lost. 

The establishment of the shorter 
ballot and the budget system in the 
greatest state in the Union will 
powerfully influence sentiment in these 
directions in other states. It would 
be a pity to lose the opportunity for 
this far reaching influence. The 
adoption and the installation of these 
two things in New York would ad- 
vance these two ideas the country 
over more than many years and many 
thousands of dollars spent in prop- 
aganda work. 

Besides, the long step toward home 
rule is highly worth while. Many 
other states, Massachusetts for ex- 
ample, need just that thing. And 
the opportunity to extend the benefits 
of workingmen's compensation to oc- 
cupational diseases in the leading 
state of our Union should certainly 
not be missed. 

True, popular government, or pop- 
ular control of government, has been 
entirely ignored in state matters, ex- 
cept as the increased power and re- 
sponsibility of the governor may be 
construed as popular government 
through him, and the theory that the 
conspicuousness of the position will 
compel true and faithful service to 
the public interests. I hope that this 
theory will be tested in New YorK. 
for the state has no popular govern- 
ment now, and anything that there 
may be in this theory will be clear 
gain. At the same time the voters 



Editorial 



223 



of New York State should realize that 
they will gain an immense amount in 
the way of opportunity for popular 
control of local government in the 
municipal article. 

It is unfortunate that the governor 
is given a two-year term instead of a 
four-year term. Half our states have 
a four-year governor's term, and no 
complaint has been made of it. New 
York will need, under the amended 
constitution, a governor of exception- 
al ability and moral determination. 
He should be really a $20,000 man; 
but a $20,000 man does not wish to 
accept an engagement for only two 
years. The delegates in the conven- 
tion prated much about the rights of 
the people, control by the people, etc., 
pretending to think that the election 
of men to office for short terms, so 
they would have to come up frequent- 
ly for re-election is the only way in 
which the people can control the 
government. In fact they cannot 
control the government in that way. 
This has been proved repeatedly 
for many years. The Recall is 
the best instrument for the control 
of officials, and the Initiative and Ref- 
erendum are the best instruments for 
controlling legislation. 

With the Recall, the term of the 
governor of New York could safely 
be made not only four years, but 
seven, nine or ten years. With such 
a term, a superior man could afford 
to make a term in the governor's 
chair in our leading state the main 
part of a distinguished career. The 
possibility of a Recall would prevent 
abuse of power, and it would not pre- 
vent a really competent man with 
confidence in himself from taking the 
place. The greatest danger to the 
success of the convention's plan of 
concentration is the short term of the 
governor. However, this defect can 
be remedied at any time by the usual 



amending process, and other states 
should not fall into this error. And 
as to the Initiative and Referendum 
and other desirable features not in- 
cluded by this convention, these have 
as good a chance next year or any 
year thru the usual amending process 
as tho this convention had never had 
an existence. — Editor.] 



A California Testimonial to the Dis- 
criminating Powers of the Voters 

Frederick M. Davenport of New 
York, has written for the Outlook an 
account of his personal investigation 
of political conditions in the western 
states, in the series entitled "On the 
Trail of Progress and Reaction in 
the West." He has evidently tried 
to get at the inner truth of the mat- 
ter and to diagnose the inner condi- 
tion in each of the several states 
visited. The series is highly illum- 
inating, so far as it goes. Speaking 
of the election in California, last year, 
when 48 measures were on the bal- 
lot, Mr. Davenport makes this strik- 
ing comment: 

"California displayed the most ex- 
uberant and discriminating non- 
partisan judgment upon both toen 
and measures. She re-elected the Pro- 
gressive Johnson by a huge majority. 
She chose the Democratic United 
States Senator John D. Phelan over 
the Progressive Francis J. Heney, 
he stood the acid test of direct democracy, 
by carefully picking 27 out of 48 pieces of 
legislation and constitutional amendment 
which appeared on the ballot, displaying 
a liberal intelligence and ability that should 
excite at least admiration even from a 
Bourbon reactionary." 



Actual participation in government 
by the governed is recognized by all 
as the hope of democracy. Experience 
of the states or cities using the I. and 
R. shows an increasing per cent, of 
votes cast on measures as well as on 
candidates. 



224 



CHANGING THE FUNDAMENTAL LAW 



A Review of the Practice of all the States as to the Vote 
Adopt Constitutional Amendments or to Authorize 
vention to Revise the Constitution 



Required 
a Con- 



to 



If a proposition is to be decided 
by popular* vote, shall it be decided 
by the vote on that proposition or by 
the vote on some other proposition? 

The average citizen will at once 
say, "what an absurd question!" Put 
this question to the next man you 
meet on the street and what will be 
his answer? Ask it of, say, an Irish 
hod carrier, and he will not answer 
it; but instead he will ask, "What's 
the matter with you?" Then he will 
be likely to recommend a doctor or a 
hospital for mental aberrations. 

This is a very serious question, 
however, and we propose to treat it 
seriously. When we realize that hun- 
dreds of constitutional amendments 
have been defeated, not by the votes 
cast on those propositions but by the 
votes cast on entirely different ques- 
tions, we are convinced that the 
method of determining whether or not 
the voters want a certain change in 
the fundamental law is a very serious 
matter, and that the importance and 
seriousness of it are not duly appre- 
ciated. 

The plain and painful fact is this: 
in 13 states constitutional amend- 
ments are not adopted by a majority 
of the votes cast on the proposition, 
but by a majority of the votes cast 
for candidates for public office. Does 
that sound strange? Yet it is true. 

Let us make as generous an ex- 
planation as possible. The makers of 
some early constitutions, when decid- 
ing how amendments shall be adopted 
easily fell into the error of "a major- 
ity of the votes cast," not taking into 
consideration that more votes are al- 
ways cast for candidates than on con- 



stitutional amendments. Ignorant vo- 
ters will vote for their friends on the 
ticket or for their party's candidate, 
without paying attention to anything 
else on the ballot. Thus they fail to 
vote either for or against an amend- 
ment submitted, even if it be on the 
same ballot with the candidates. 

The wording, "a majority of the 
votes cast," counts as against the 
amendment all the voters who vote 
for candidates but fail to vote on the 
amendment.* This is manifestly un- 
fair. It does not register the true 
sentiment of the voters. WTien we 
realize how unfair the innocent ap- 
pearing phrase above mentioned is, 
we can understand how important the 
little word thereon can be in this con- 
n ction. "A majority of the votes 
cast thereon' 1 is a wording that leads 
to the true register of opinion; or, as 
some constitutions have it, "a major- 
ity of the votes on the proposition" or 
"on the question." 

Certain states need, more than 
anything else, a campaign strong 
enough and long enough to put the 
little word thereon in the amending 
clause of their fundamental law. 

The purpose of this article is not 
so much to argue this question as to 
give a plain and complete presenta- 
tion of the facts, which speak el- 
oquently enough for themselves. 
Students of government know the im- 

♦Note. — In Idaho and Wyoming the require- 
ment is, a majority of all the qualified rtgi 
voters. See list No. 2 for different phrasings. 
This is even more severe and unreasonable 
than "a majority of the votes cast," for it 
counts as against the proposition all those who 
fail to go to the polls and vote. Failure to 
vote for any candidate for a certain office is 
never counted against the candidate for that 
office. 



Editorial 



225 



portance of this subject; many of 
the facts have been presented and 
discussed in technical books or public 
documents. But so far as we are 
aware, the experience of all our 
states from their beginning has never 
before been presented with dates 
showing the development of state 
constitutions on this point. We here 
present the facts, not only for the 
students of this subject but in the 
hope that journalists and practical 
men of affairs will take hold with a 
determination to put the amending 
clause of every state constitution on 
a just and true basis, such that the intel- 
ligence of the state may rule rather than 
its ignorance. 

Discussions of this subject have 
usually paid more attention to the 
popular adoption of separate amend- 
ments than to the revision of consti- 
tutions by special conventions author- 
ized by popular vote. We have kept 
distinct these two different processes 
of amendment so that the develop- 
ment of each can be examined and 
compared along parallel lines. 

Some Variations 
Some interesting devices have been 
resorted to in states that count those 
who fail to vote on an amendment as 
against it. The most unique was the 
method resorted to in Alabama. In 
1898 the legislature provided that the 
ballots (bearing the names of candi- 
dates) should have printed on them 
"For Birmingham Amendment." It 
was provided that leaving the words 
on the ballot should be taken as a vote 
in favor of the amendment. Those 
opposed had to cross out this printed 
wording on the ballot. In this way 
the ignorant, careless and indifferent 
vote was counted for the amendment. 
But this can no longer be done in Ala- 
bama, as the constitution of 1901 re- 
quires "Yes" and "No" to be printed 
on the ballots so that the voter may 



put a cross "opposite the word ex- 
pressing his desire." This leaves it 
open again for that large class of 
incompetents to make no cross at all, 
and thus be counted as against every 
amendment submitted. 

Nebraska, in 1901, provided by 
statute that: "A state convention of 
any political party may take action 
upon any constitutional amendment, 
which is to be voted upon at the fol- 
lowing election, and said convention 
may declare for or against such 
amendment, and such declaration 
shall be considered as a portion of 

their ticket " When a political 

party indorsed a proposed amend- 
ment, such indorsement was printed 
on the party ticket, and this carried a 
favorable vote for the amendment on 
straight party votes. Of course the 
same plan could be used against an 
amendment. This law remained in 
force until 1907, when a mandatory 
direct primary law was passed, doing 
away with party conventions. It was 
then provided that the adoption or" 
rejection of proposed amendments be 
submitted on all party ballots in the 
primaries, and in this way determin- 
ing the position of parties concerning 
amendments. 

The Nebraska plan was copied in 
Ohio in 1902, but the revision of 
Ohio's constitution in 1912 rendered 
the continuance of this device un- 
necessary. 

The facts here presented may sur- 
prise some students of government, 
as they have never before been dug 
out and tabulated. 

Record of the States Concerning the 
Popular Adoption of Separate Con- 
stitutional Amendments. 

LIST NO. 1. 

31 states, in the plan first used by 
them for adopting constitutional amend- 
ments by popular vote, required a major- 



226 Equity 

ity of the votes cast on the proposition. are given in the article, "The Rule of the Ig- 

They are, with the year of adoption n ° r ant," in another part of this issue. Courts 

j. .-. ... ,. . 7 • 7 .7 • t i n certain other states might consider this 

of the constitution in which this pro- decision tQ advantage . 

vision first occurred, as follows: tin west Virginia's enabling act (1861) a 

Arizona (1911) special election was required for all amendments 

Arkansas (1868^* or * or a conven tion call. In 1872 the same 

„,.„ . " . . plan was retained for the convention but the 

Galliornia (1849) amendments were submitted at a general 

Connecticut (1818) * election but by a majority on the proposition. 

Colorado (1876) 'The language of the amending clause of the 

Florida (18681* Connecticut constitution (1818) provides that "at 

' \ ' I* a tQ wn meeting legally warned and held for 

iOWa ( . . (18o7) tna t purpose" the adoption of amendments sub- 

Kentucky (1890)* mitted by the legislature shall be by "a major- 
Maine . (1819) ity oi tne electors present at such meeting." 

Maryland (1867)* 

Massachusetts ....... (1780) LIST NO. 2. 

Michigan (1850) 15 states, in the plan first used by 

Minnesota . (1857)f them for adopting constitutional amend- 

Missouri (1865)* ments by popular vote, required a major- 

Montana (1889) ity of all voters, or of all votes cast at 

Nevada (1864) the election at which candidates are also 

New Hampshire .... (1784) voted for. By this method, all voters 

New Jersey (Special not voting, or all voters voting for candi- 

election required) (1844)* dates but failing to vote on the amendment 

New Mexico (1911) or amendments submitted, are counted 

New York (1821) as against the amendment or amend- 

North Dakota (1889) ments. These 15 states, with year of 

Pennsylvania (1838)* constitution's adoption, and the wording 

Rhode Island (1842) °f ^ ie provision in each case, were as 

South Carolina (1868)* follows: 

South Dakota (1889) Alabama (1819)— "Majority of all 

Utah . (1895) tne citizens of this State vot- 

Vermont .......... (1793) in S for representatives' ' etc. 

Virginia (1870)* Idaho (1889) — "A majority of the 

Washington (1889) electors" etc. 

West Virginia (1861)$ Illinois (1848)*— "A majority of ail 

Wisconsin (1848) the electors voting at such 

*The states marked with a star had one or election for members of the 

more earlier constitutions, but no provision house of representatives" etc. 

was made in same for the submission of amend- T ■,. /-.o--i\* u\ -~ •*. -e „;j 

ma . + , . T , .. Indiana (18ol)* — A majoritv of said 

ments to popular vote. These earlier con- v . 

stitutions, some amendable by legislative act electors [viz: the electors of 

and others by special conventions, were as the state] shall ratify" etc. 

follows: Arkansas, 1836 and 1864; Florida, T , ,„„__,. ,. K . - , 

1838 and 1S65; Iowa, 1846; Kentucky, 1799 Kansas (185o)— "A majority of elec- 

and 1850; Maryland, 1776, 1851 and 1S64; tors voting at such election" 

Missouri, 1820; New Jersey, 1776; Pennsyl- e ^ c# 

vania, 1776 and 1790; South Carolina, 1776, . .. , 

1778, 1790 and 1S65; Virginia, 1776, 1830. Louisiana (1845)*— "A majority of 

1850 and 1864. the qualified electors" etc. 

tThe wording of the amending clause of changed in 1852 to: "major- 

this first Minnesota constitution would put - ,, . , . 

Minnesota into List No. 2 except for a broad lt J f the VOteTS at Said eleC ~ 

and liberal judicial decision, details of which tion" etc. 






Editorial 



227 



Mississippi (1832)*— "Majority of the 
qualified electors voting for 
members of the legislature" 
etc. 

Nebraska (1875)*— "A majority of 
the electors voting at such 
election" etc. 

North Carolina (1835)*— (By amend- 
ment to constitution of 1776) 
— "A majority of" * * ''the 
votes given." 

Ohio (1851)— "Majority of the elec- 
tors voting at such election," 
etc. 

Oklahoma (1907)— "Majority of all 
the voters voting at such 
election" etc. 

Oregon (1857) — "Majority of said 
electors" etc. [of the State.] 

Tennessee (1834)*— "Majority of all 
the citizens of the State 
voting for representatives," 
etc. 

Texas (1845)f — (Same as Tennessee). 

Wyoming (1889)— "If a majority of 
the electors shall ratify "etc. 

♦The states in this list marked with a star 
had an earlier constitution, but no provision of 
any kind was made in same for the submission of 
amendments to popular vote. These earlier 
constitutions, amendable only by the legis- 
lature, special convention or other devices, 
were as follows: Illinois, 1818; Indiana, 1816; 
Louisiana, 1812; Mississippi, 1817; Nebraska, 
1866; North Carolina, 1776; Tennessee, 1796. 

tTexas, prior to its annexation by the 
United States (1845), had received a constitu- 
tion from the Republic of Mexico (1827) in 
which the method of amendment was by act of 
the state "congress." Amendments were 
presented in writing. If supported and signed 
by two-thirds of the deputies, they were to be 
admitted or rejected by the next congress; 
if admitted, they were to be published anew, 
and circulated by the governor to be read in 
the next electoral assemblies before appoint- 
ing deputies to congress. If the following 
congress approved, the constitution was so 
amended. Thus favorable action by three con- 
gresses was required. In 1836 came the Texas 
Declaration of Independence, and the state 
adopted a constitution, but it contained no 
amending clause. 



LIST NO. 3. 

In 9 states the plan of adopting 

amendments submitted to popular vote 

has been altered at various times and 

in different ways, as follows: 

Arkansas, in 1'874, changed from ma- 
jority on the proposition to 
majority at general election. 
In 1910 the adoption of the 
Initiative and Referendum 
amendment required a "ma- 
jority thereon" for amend- 
ments submitted by initiative 
petition. 

Kansas, in 1859, from majority at 
general election to majority 
on proposition. 

Louisiana, in 1879, from majority at 
general election to majority 
on propostion. 

Ohio, in 1912, from majority at gen- 
eral election to majority on 
the proposition for amend- 
ments submitted either by 
the legislatuie or by initia- 
tive petition. 

Oregon, in 1902, from majority at 
general election to majority 
on the proposition for amend- 
ments by initiative petition; 
and, in 1906, to majority 
thereon for legislative sub- 
missions. 

Minnesota, in 1898, from the court- 
interpreted provision of a 
majority on the proposition, 
to that of a majority of the 
votes cast at a general elec- 
tion. 

North Carolina, in 1868, from major- 
ity at general election to ma- 
jority on the proposition; 
and, in 1876, back to a ma- 
jority of votes cast at a gen- 
eral election. 

Texas, in 1866, from majority at a 
general election to majority 
on the proposition (subject 
to approval of two-thirds of 



228 



Equity 



the next legislature); and, 
in 1876, back to a majority 
of the votes cast. 
Nebrask , in 1912, from majority of 
votes cast at general election 
to a majority thoreon for 
amendments by initiative pe- 
gs* tition. 

Summary of Changes: 
Four States (Kansas, Louisiana, 
Ohio and Oregon) have changed from 
the majority for candidates plan to 
the majority on the proposition. 

Two States (Minnesota and Arkan- 
sas) have changed from the majority 
on the proposition to the majority 
for candidates. But Arkansas has 
returned to the former plan on 
amendments by popular initiative. 

LIST NO. 4. 

34 states, in the plan at present used 
by them for adopting constitutional 
amendments by popular vote, require a 
majority of the votes cast on the proposi- 
tion. They are as follows: 
Arizona 
California 
Connecticut 
Colorado 
Florida 
Georgia 
Iowa 
Kansas 
Kentucky 
Louisiana 
Maine 
Maryland 
Massachusetts 
Michigan 
Missouri 
Montana 
Nevada 



New Hampshire 
New Jersey 
New Mexico 
New York 
North Dakota 
Ohio 
Oregon 
Pennsylvania 
Rhode Island 
South Carolina 
South Dakota 
Utah 
Vermont 
Virginia 
Washington 
West Virginia 
Wisconsin 



LIST NO. 5. 

13 states, in the plan at present used 
by them for adopting constitutional 
amendments by popular vote, require a 
majority of the votes cast for candidates 



at a general election. They are as 

follows: 

Arkansasf 

Alabama* 

Idaho 

Illinois 

Indiana* 

Minnesota 

Mississippi 

tExcept on amendments by popular 
initiative. 

♦Special election permitted. 

One State (Delaware) has never 
had any provision for popular adop- 
tion of amendments. 



J Nebraskaf 
North Carolina 
Oklahoma* 
Tennessee 
Texas 
Wyoming 



Record of the States Concerning the 
Popular Authorization of Consti- 
tutional Conventions. 
LIST NO. 6. 

10 states, in the plan first used by 
them for deciding by popular vote the 
proposition to call a constitutional con- 
vention, required a majority voting 
thereon. They are, with year of adop- 
tion of constitution in which this pro- 
vision first occurred, as follows: 
Arizona (1911) 
California (1849) 
Missouri (1865)f 
Montana (1889)f 
Nebraska (1866) 

New Mexico (1911)— "Majority of the 
electors voting thereon and 
by an affirmative vote equal 
to at least 40 per cent, of all 
the votes cast" etc. 
Oklahoma (1911)t 
Oregon (1907)* 
West Virginia (1861)$ 
Wisconsin (1848) 

•The 1857 constitution of Oregon 
contained no provision for a conven- 
tion. 

tSpecial election permitted, but of 
no particular value in these states, 
owing to the presence of the "thereon" 
rule. 

JSpecial election required, which 
necessitates a decision by a majority 
on the question, no candidates being 
voted for. 



Editorial 



229 



LIST NO. 7. 

27 states, in the plan at first used by 
them for deciding by popular vote the 
proposition to call a constitutional con- 
vention, required a majority of all the 
votes cast at the election at which candi- 
dates were also voted for, all of said 
voters not voting on the proposition 
being counted as against it. These 
states were as follows: 

Alabama 

California 

Delaware 

Florida 

Idaho 

Illinois 

Indiana 

Iowa 

Kansas 

Kentucky 



Louisiana 

Maryland 

Michigan 

Minnesota 

Mississippi .... 

Nevada 

New Hampshire 
New York .... 
North Carolina 

Ohio 

South Carolina 
South Dakota . 

Tennessee 

Utah 

Virginia 

Washington . . . 
Wyoming , 



1875)*t 

1849) 

1792)* 

1868)* 

1889) 

1818) 

1816)f 

1846) 

1857)* 

1799) 

1812) 

1851)* 

1850)t 

1857) 

1817) 

1864) 

1792) 

1846)* 

1876)* 

1851)* 

1868) 

1889) 

1796 )f 

1895) 

1870)t 

1889) 

1889) 



♦States marked with a star had one or more 
earlier constitutions, but no provision was made 
in same for submitting convention proposition 
to popular vote. 

tSpecial election permitted. When taken 
advantage of, this permission puts the state in 
the "thereon" class, as no candidates would 
be voted for. 

LIST NO. 8. 

In 10 states the plan of convention 
authorization by popular vote has been 
altered from the majority on candidates 
to the majority on the proposition, 
as follows: 



California (1879) 

Delaware (1897) 

Florida (1885) 

Iowa (1857) 

Kentucky (1890) 

New Hampshire .... (1902) 

New York (1894) 

Ohio (Including amend- 
ments by initiative 

petition ... (1912) 

Virginia (1902) 

West Virginia (1872) 

One state, Nebraska, (1875), chang- 
ed its plan of convention authoriza- 
tion from the majority thereon to the 
majority for candidates basis. 
LIST NO. 9. 
11 states have never had a plan of 
convention authorization by popular vote. 
They are: 

Arkansas North Dakota 

Connecticut Pennsylvania 

Georgia* Rhode Island 

Maine Texas 

Massachusetts Vermont 

New Jersey 

*In Georgia's first constitution the pro- 
vision was made that a convention would be 
held on the petition of a majority of voters in 
a majority of counties. But this was done 
away with and the calling of a convention was 
authorized by act of the legislature (1877). 

In these states usually the prac- 
tice of the legislature has been to 
submit, though not required nor for- 
bidden. 

Summary: From lists 6, 7, and 8 it 
may be readily seen that there are 
now 19 states authorizing conventions 
by the majority thereon plan, and 18 
states by the majority for candidates 
plan. In 11 states there is no pro^ 
vision. 



The Rule of the Ignorant 

At Minnesota's election, last No- 
vember, 168,004 votes were cast for 
the Initiative and Referendum amend- 
ment to the state constitution, as 
submitted by the legislature, and 



230 



Equity 



41,577 votes in the negative— a ma- 
jority of almost 4 to 1 on this proposi- 
tion designed to enable the voters to 
exercise in fact, the power which in 
theory they hold, namely, the power 
to control its legislative agents. 

Nevertheless, under the rule which 
was injected into the constitution of 
Minnesota through either the cor- 
ruption or the ignorance of its legis- 
lators in 1898, that proposition was 
officially declared "defeated" because 
the affirmative vote was somewhat 
less than a majority of all the votes 
cast for candidates at that election. 

Now, the 1915 Legislature, having 
once more submitted the I. and R. 
amendment to the constitution, the 
people of Minnesota are again enter- 
ing a campaign on the same proposi- 
tion, knowing that in order to take 
thijs forward step toward a more 
representative government they must 
overcome not those who oppose it 
with their votes, but all who through 
ignorance or indifference or accident 
fail to vote either way on the ques- 
tion submitted. 

A Barrier to Progress 

Nor is this barrier to progress con- 
fined in its application to the Initia- 
tive and Referendum. Let no oppon- 
ent of popular government thus con- 
sole himself, for this unjust method 
of counting the vote on amendments 
has served to defeat almost every 
measure of merit on any subject which 
has been submitted to the voters of 
Minnesota since the disaster of 
1898. Look for a moment at the bal- 
lot of last year, on which eleven prop- 
ositions were submitted, ten besides 
that for the I. and R. Only one of 
these succeeded in overcoming the 
big handicap of the ignorant vote. 
That was a provision authorizing the 
use of certain state lands for state 
forests. Among the propositions of 
undoubted merit which received over- 



whelming majorities, but which under 
the unfair rule failed, were the fol- 
lowing: 

Providing that no statute shall 
be held unconstitutional by less 
than five (5) judges, and that the 
clerk shall be appointed by the 
court. 

Setting apart a revolving fund 
from the school and swamp land 
funds to be used in constructing 
roads, ditches and fire breaks in, 
through and around school and 
swamp lands. 

Authorizing the investment and 
loaning of school funds on improv- 
ed farm lands within the state. 

Providing for the recall of public 
officials. 

Similar results were experienced 
in previous elections ever since 1898, 
and during the period from then till 
now no less than thirty proposed 
amendments dealing with a variety 
of progressive measures have failed 
of adoption, while in all that time 
only five have overcome the barrier. 

It is the plain truth therefore, to 
say that progress is limited to the 
pace of the ignorant and indifferent 
voters in Minnesota, and in every 
other state where this requirement 
of a majority of all voting for candi- 
dates to adopt amendments to the 
fundamental law still prevails. Do 
the people of Minnesota fully realize 
their predicament?* The story of how 
Minnesota came to tie herself up in 
this fashion should be kept before 
the people of that state and indeed 
of the whole country as a warning. 
It was told with some detail by C. J. 
Buell of Minneapolis in the Chicago 
Public of January 8, 1915, as follows: 

Story of Minnesota 

It was during the legislative session 
cf 1897 that the change was made. W. 



*In another part of this issue will 
be found a comprehensive review of 
the practice of all the states as to the 
method of popular ratification of 
stitutional amendments and of pro- 
posals for a constitution 



Editorial 



231 



W. Dunn was at that time attorney 
for the Hamra Brewing Company of 
St. Paul, and was their representative 
in the legislature, having been elected 
on the Republican ticket by the voters 
of that part of the city near the plant 
of the brewing company. 

Mr. Dunn brought in a bill propos- 
ing to so amend the constitution that 
thereafter it should require a majority 
of all those present and voting at the 
election to favor an amendment before 
it could become a part of the funda- 
mental law. 

On the floor of the House, S. A. 
Stockwell, a member from Minneapolis, 
put the question squarely up to Mr. 
Dunn, as follows: 

"Do the forces that are behind this 
amendment intend to put up the bars 
so high that no further amendment 
of the constitution will be possible on 
any subject, in order to head off the 
possibility of the passage of a prohibi- 
tion amendment at some time in the 
distant future?" 

Mr. Dunn answered: "The gentleman 
from Hennlpin is correctly informed." 
The proposed amendment passed both 
House and Senate, and was submitted 
to the people at the election of 1898. 
The brewery interests were united and 
alei t. The word was sent out to every 
saloon in the State to get all the votes 
possible, in a quiet way, in favor of 
the brewers' amendment. 

The decent people of the State were 

caught napping and the amendment 

d. If the people could have 

been informed they would probably 

have voted it down. 

With this story before us, we were 
surprised to find that the language 
of the amending clause of the 1857 
constitution appeared to place Min- 
nesota in the class of those states 
hampered by the unjust rule as to 
counting silence as a vote against a 
proposition. 

An Enlightened Decision 
We wrote to several experts in 
Minnesota and all replied that they 
had not before examined the original 
text and could not explain it, but 
they knew that in practice amend- 
ments had been adopted by a "ma- 



jority thereon" prior to 1898. Finally 
came a letter from State Senator Ole 
Sageng citing a decision of the 
Supreme Court giving a liberal inter*- 
pretation to this amending clause. 
He inclosed a leaf torn from an old 
legislative manual on which was a 
footnote in fine print giving the gist 
of that decision and the fact that it 
was reported in "22 Minn. 400." With 
this information in hand we found in 
the law library this important opin- 
ion, dated Feb. 18, 1876, credited to 
Judge Gilfillan in re Maria B. Dayton 
vs. City of St. Paul, from which the 
following passage was copied con- 
taining the broader interpretation: 

11 We are of the opinion that the words 
(of the Const. Art. 9.,S. 1 — "that a majority 
of the voters present, and voting shall 
have ratified etc.") refer to the voters who 
are present and vote upon the proposi- 
tion submitted to the electors, without 
respect to those who may be present 
and vote for other purposes at an election 
which may be held at the same time and 
place at which the proposition, for 
reasons of convenience or other reasons, 
is submitted; and t'.at those who may, at 
such time and place, come and vote for 
other purposes only are not to be re- 
garded as present and voting, so far as 
respects the proposed amendment. 

"It is the general rule, in affairs of 
government, that an election, or a voting, 
whenever called for, is to be determined 
by the votes of those who vote to fill the 
office which is to be filled, or for or against 
the proposition which is to be adopted 
or rejected, and not by counting, on 
either side, those who do not vote at all. 
To take a case out of this general rule 
requires a clearly manifested intention 
to apply a different one, and in two 
instances we find that the framers of the 
constitution have clearly manifested such 
an intention." 

The two instances referred to are 
true as to the calling of a convention — 
"by a majority of all the electors voting 



232 



Equity 



at said election" and as to changing 
county lines subject to voters of counties 
concerned. 

In the July issue of the Citizen, 
published at Indianapolis, Indiana, by 
the Citizens' League of Indiana, Stiles 
P. Jones of Minneapolis is quoted as 
to the practical effect of Minnesota's 
present method of measuring the pop- 
ular will regarding a given proposi- 
tion submitted at a general election. 
Says Mr. Jones: 

It was simply a case of the foxy, 
forward looking, always-on-the-job 
combination of special interests, 
working through an easy going legis- 
lature, "putting something over" on 
an uneducated and unsuspecting and 
easy going public. ****** 

The sandbagging results of the ex- 
isting rule are attested by the fact 
that since 1898 but five out of thirty- 
five amendments proposed have been 
adopted and one of those only through 
the assistance of judicial construc- 
tion. Many received majorities as 
hig-n as three or four to one of those 
voting on the proposition and still 
failed of adoption. As showing the 
absurdity of the present system note 
the following: 

When 50 per cent of those at the 
election vote on a measure it requires 
89 per cent of them to pass it. 

When 60 per cent of those at the 
election vote on a measure it requires 
83 per cent of them to pass it. 

When 65 per cent of those at the 
election vote on a measure it requires 
77 per cent of them to pass it. 

When 70 per cent of those at the 
election vote on a measure it requires 
70 per cent of them to pass it. 

This means that inasmuch as the 
average vote in Minnesota on Con- 
stitutional Amendments is 56' per cent, 
nine out of every ten men that ex- 
press that opinon on a proposition 
have to favor it before it can be 
adopted. 

Query: Is this majority or minority 
rule? 

This sort of thing means in fact 
the rule of the ignorant and indiffer- 
ent, or at any rate that progress has 
to set its pace to the limited under- 
standing of the ignorant. For after 
all, the indifference of the "educated" 
and well-to-do voters is proof posi- 



tive of their essential ignorance to 
their own welfare, as well as that of 
the community in which they live. The 
method of popular amendment to the 
fundamental law which counts the 
silent voter as a negative voter simply 
puts a premium on ignorance and in- 
difference. The pecple of Mninesota 
should wake up to this truth, and in- 
sist on electing men to the legislature 
who will submit an amendment revok- 
ing this absurd method. 



PERVERSION OF AMENDING 
PLANS. 



A Plea for Liberal Construction of the 
Amendment Sections of State 
Constitutions. 

In the light of the important but 
neglected decision of the Minnesota 
Supreme Court quoted on page 231 
in this issue, let us examine the word- 
ing of the amending articles in some 
other states. Articles 284 and 2S5 cf 
the Alabama Constitution (1901) are 
as follows: 

***** the Legislature shall order an election 
by the qualified electors of the State upon 
the proposed amendments, to be held either 
at the general election next succeeding the 
session of the Legislature at which the 
amendments are proposed or upon another 
day appointed by the Legislature not less 
than three months after the final adjourn- 
ment of the session of the Legislature at 
which the amendments were proposed. 
Notice of such election, together with the 
proposed amendments, shall be given by 
proclamation of the Governor, vhich shall be 
published in every county in such manner as 
the Legislature shall direct, for at least eight 
successive weeks next preceding the day ap- 
pointed for such election. On the day so 
appointed an election shall be held for the 
vote of the qualified electors of the State upon 
the proposed amendments. If such election 
be held on the day of the general election, 
the officers of such general election shall 
open a poll for the vote of the qualified 
electors upon the proposed amendments: 
if it be held on a day other than thai of a 
general election, officers for such (■ 
shall be appointed, and the election shall be 
held in all things in accordance with the 



Editorial 



233 



law governing general elections. In all 
elections upon such proposed amendments, 
the votes cast thereat shall be canvassed, 
tabulated and returns thereof be made to 
the Secretary of State, and counted, in the 
same manner as In elections for Represent- 
atives to the Legislature; and if it shall 
thereupon appear that a majority of the 
Qualified electors who voted at such election 
upon the proposed amendments voted in favor 
of the same, such amendments shall be valid 
to all intents and purposes as parts of this 
Constitution. The results of such election 
shall be made known by proclamation of 
the Governor.***** 

285. Upon the ballots used at all 
elections provided for in Section 284 of this 
Constitution, the substance or subject 
matter of each proposed amendment shall 
be so printed that the nature thereof shal 1 
be clearly indicated. Following each pro- 
posed amendment on the ballot shall be 
printed the word "yes" and Immediately 
under that shall be printed the word "No." 
The choice of the elector shall be indicated 
by a cross mark made by him or under his 
direction opposite the word expressing his 
desire, and no amendment shall be adopted 
unless it receives the affirmative vote of a 
majority of all the qualified electors who 
tote at such election. 

The theory of the Minnesota Su- 
preme Court in the case refer- 
red to is that the election concern- 
ing constitutional amendments is a 
different election from the election at 
which candidates are elected, even 
though the two elections be held on 
the same day and at the same places. 
Certainly a vote for candidates and a 
vote for or against a constitutional 
amendment are different kinds of 
votes and for entirely different pur- 
poses. This fact goes far to sub- 
stantiate the theory of the Minne- 
sota Supreme Court that such elec- 
tions are separate elections even 
though they sometimes occur simul- 
taneously. 

In the light of this theory, parts 
of the above quoted sections from 
the Alabama Constitution have been 
italicized, and these italicized portions 
plainly show that the election there 
authorized has nothing whatever to 
do with an election at which candi- 



dates are elected, excepting that the 
two elections may occur simultane- 
ously. 

The language of the Alabama Con- 
ititution states that the Legislature 
shall order an election upon the pro- 
posed amendments; and this election 
may be held either on the same day 
upon which a general election is held 
or "upon another day." Here we see 
clearly that the creators of the consti- 
tution had two elections clearly in 
mind. Further, we note that notice 
of such election shall be given in a 
certain way, which makes it separ- 
ate and distinct from the ordinary 
general elections. And "on the day 
so appointed" this election shall be 
held, but whether or not the day shall 
be on the same day upon which the 
general election is held is entirely 
incidental. Also, "if it be held on a 
day other than that of a general 
election," directions are given for 
"such election." This language adds 
further to the theory that the elec^ 
tion on amendments is a different 
election from the ordinary general 
election at which candidates are 
elected, and the election for the 
separate purpose may be held simul- 
taneously with the general election 
or not. This theory is still further 
borne out by the further language, 
"in all elections upon such proposed 
amendments." It would be difficult 
for language to more clearly indicate 
that the election upon proposed 
amendments is different from the 
election for the selection of candi- 
dates. This idea is expressed again 
in the words, "such election upon the 
proposed amendments." 

And here in this portion of section 
284 it is expressly stated that if it 
shall thereupon appear that a major- 
ity of the qualified electors who voted 
at such election upon the proposed 
amendments voted in favor of the 



234 



Equity 



same, such amendments shall be valid 
to all intents and purposes as parts 
of this Constitution. This clear justi- 
fication for determining the result by 
the vote upon the proposition and not 
by the vote on candidates, which is 
a thing entirely extraneous to this 
portion of the constitution, throws a 
flood of light upon the true meaning 
of these two sections. Further it is 
stated that "The results of such 
election shall be made known by pro- 
clamation of the Governor." This 
clearly refers to the election on 
amendments and not to the election 
of candidates. Here we have set forth 
as clearly as possible the fact that 
"such election" — the only kind of elec- 
tion that is authorized in this portion 
of the constitution — is entirely dif- 
ferent from and separate from any 
other election; certainly it is radically 
different from an election at which 
officials are elected, though for rea- 
sons of convenience and economy the 
two elections may be held simultan- 
eously. 

Section 285 deals only with the 
provisions in the preceding section 
(284), so all the language in section 
285 must be construed as applying 
thereto and not to any other election, 
certainly not to any other kind of 
election, not even mentioned in this 
portion of the constitution. The clos- 
ing words of section 285, "who vote 
at such election" clearly refer to the 
"such election" provided for in sec- 
tion 284; there is no other election 
provided for in that section but an 
election on constitutional amend- 
ments. So it is difficult to see how 
the courts or other authorities of Ala- 
bama find authority to mix these two 
kinds of elections (even though they 
may occur simultaneously), and hold 
that a constitutional amendment must 
command a number of votes equal to 
a majority of the votes cast on 
candidates in order to be adopted. 



Article XXIV, Section I of the ex- 
isting Oklahoma constitution reads as 
follows: 

"***** and referred by the secretary of state 
to the people for their approval or rejection, 
at the next regular general election, except 
when the legislature, by two-thirds vote 
of each house, shall order a special election, 
for that purpose. If a majority of all the 
electors voting at such election shall 
vote in favor of any amendment thereto, 
it shall thereby become a part of this con- 
stitution." 

This language does not state as 
clearly as does the language of the 
Alabama Constitution that the action 
of the electors on submitted consti- 
tuional amendments is a different 
election; but the fact that it specifi- 
cally provides that a special election 
may be ordered implies that the elec- 
tion on constitutional amendments is 
different from the election of candi- 
dates. 

Section 2 of the same article deals 
with constitutional conventions. It 
reads as follows: 

Sec. 2. "No convention shall be c 
by the legislature to propose alterati. n 
visions, or amendments to this co: 
tion, or to propose a new constitution, 
unless the law providing for such conven- 
tion shall first be approved by the people 
on a referendum vote at a regular or special 
election, and any amendments, alterations, 
revisions, or new constitution, proposed by 
such convention, shall be submitted to the 
electors of the State at a general or special 
election and be approved by a majority of 
the electors voting thereon, before the same 
shall become effective; Provided, that the 
question of such proposed convention 
shall be submitted to the people at least 
once in every twenty years." 

Here the little word "thereon" is 
inserted, and this leads to a reason- 
able implication that it was meant 
also in the preceding section, as the 
voting on the measure submitted in 
either case is of an entirely different 
character and for a different purpose 
from the voting on candidates. 

The history of Texas in regard to 
this question is very interesting. 
The first Constitution of Texas (1845) 



Editorial 235 

required for the adoption of consti- votes for candidates. The voters who 
tutional amendments "a majority of voted for candidates but who failed to 
all the citizens of this State voting vote either way on the amendment 
for representatives." were counted against the amendment. 
In the Constitution of 1866 the re- This is only one of the many, many 
quirement was "a majority of the instances in which the intelligent ma- 
votes cast upon said proposed amend- jority has been defeated by the ignor- 
ment or amendments." ant and indifferent silent majority, 
In the Constitution for 1876 the in those states which permit the ig- 
requirement is "a majority of the norant silent vote to bar progress, 
votes cast." But previous to this 

language is the following provision; Minority Control of Congress 
"and it shall be the duty of the sev- Much has been said, and justly, 
eral returning officers of said election against the very general practice of 
to open a poll for, and make returns continually electing new men to corn- 
to, the Secretary of State of the P*"ise the bulk of the membership of 
number of legal votes cast at said successive state legislatures. These 
election for and against said amend- new members, lacking in legislative 
ments." Provision is also made for experience and in special training or 
publishing the proposed amendments equipment for legislative duties, are 
in newspapers throughout the State, easily manipulated by the few exper- 
So it is reasonable to suppose that ienced hold-overs, who in many cases 
the creators of the constitution meant, are under the secret guidance of the 
as in the former constitution, that agents of Special Privilege, 
the votes cast for and against any But if this situation is true of our 
proposed amendment should decide State Legislatures, how much better 
as to its ratification. on? m this respect is the lower House 
Based upon the construction by the of Congress? There the proportion 
Minnesota Supreme Court above re- of hold-overs is generally understood 
ferred to, we make the above plea for to be somewhat higher than in most 
a liberal construction of the amending of the State Legislatures. But there 
sections of other state constitutions, is no necessity of being in doubt 
when they plainly admit of such con- about the facts. Quite recently we 
struction. However, when a constitu- nave had the privilege of examining 
tion makes such a requirement as "a a table prepared by Mr. Lynn Haines, 
majority of all votes cast for repre- Secretary of the National Voters' 
sentatives," there is no remedy except League, of Washington, D. C, show- 
changing this part of the constitu- in g the length of service of every 
t j on> member elect of the new (64th) Con- 
One of the many occurrences illus- £ re ss which is to have its first meet- 
trating the importance of the above in S in December next. From this 
technical and apparently uninterest- table we have computed the follow- 
ing subject, is the following: On Nov. i n 2 totals: 
3, 1908, a good roads amendment was Members-elect (not in last 

voted on in Alabama. The vote was Congress) 155 

45,794 for, to 25,806 against. The Second-term members 110 

amendment was declared lost, because Third-term members 52 

the affirmative vote was not a major- Fourth-term members 25 

ity of 103,399, the total number of Fifth-term (or longer) members.. 91 



236 



Equity 



A further examination of the anal- 
ysis furnished by the Voters' League 
brings out the equally significant 
fact that the chairmen of nearly all 
the House committees have served 
five terms or longer. So have the 
ranking Democratic and Republican 
members of these committees. 

This makes it perfectly apparent 
that the absolute control of the or- 
ganization of the next House, and the 
direction of its legislation, rests in 
the hands of this small minority of 
old-timers in both parties; while the 
big majority of new or recent mem- 
bers (unless something is done to 
arouse them to the situation) will 
tamely submit to this tyrannical sys- 
tem, as a similar majority has done 
at the beginning of previous Con- 
gresses, because the new members 
are either ignorant of the rules of 
the game or are the slaves of a party 
organization which plays into the 
hands of the bi-partisan "invisible 
government." 

Is this condition of affairs con- 
ducive to good government? Is it 
truly representative government ? 
Quite the reverse; and the only way 
we know to alter this system of a 
self perpetuating, bi-partisan ring in 
control of the Lower House of Con- 
gress is for someone to organize a 
revolt among the new members if 
enough of them can be found who 
have the requisite independence of 
spirit 

To be effective, such a revolt must 
be organized before the opening of 
the new Congress, else the old rules 
will be adopted in their entirety and 
the same small minority of hold-over 
committee chairmen will be again in 
the saddle. A movement to avoid 
this embarrassing situation has al- 
ready been started by the National 
Voters' League, a detailed account 
of which appeared in the April 



Equity (page 95.) Anyone desiring 
to get in touch with this movement 
may address Mr. Lynn Haines at 831 
Woodward Building, Washington, D. C. 

The fact of the matter is that our 
Lower House is entirely too numerous 
for the most efficient legislative ser- 
vice. A body composed of 435 men 
is necessarily unwieldy; it could be 
reduced more than half to very great 
advantage, considerable economy and 
with an actual gain in legitimate 
representation of the voters in var- 
ious sections of the country. This 
would be especially true if the mem- 
bers of the House could be then 
chosen on the plan of proportional 
representation. 

But the important matter of a re- 
duction in the size of the House is 
possibly not the first step that can 
be taken in order to throw off the 
intolerable yoke of this system of 
minority control. If concerted action 
can be taken before the yoke is again 
placed upon the neck of the new 
Congress, certain important changes 
may be made in the rules of the 
House which will pave the way for 
other radical changes in procedure 
and organization. The Voters' League 
proposes a gateway amendment to 
the rules designed to make it pc - 
to amend the rules at any time dur- 
ing the session when a majority so 
desires. It is also proposed to re*- 
duce the number of committees and 
so to group their functions as to 
equalize their respective importance. 
A third step looking toward the more 
democratic organization of the House 
is to authorize each committee to 
select its own chairman and choose 
its own employees. Other suggested 
changes are: to forbid the holding of 
secret sessions by any committee and 
require a record of all committee 
proceedings to be kept; to require all 
committees to report matters referred 



Editorial 



237 



to them within a reasonable time; to 
do away with the irresponsible "com- 
mittee of the whole" where record 
votes are dodged. 

But in addition to these we would 
like to suggest that this great legis- 
lative body should be at all times its 
own master. A rule should be adopt- 
ed whereby any measure might be 
brought up for consideration when- 
ever 107c of the members shall have 
signed a formal demand for its con- 
sideration. This would prevent the 
pigeonholing of measures referred 
to committees, and it would prevent 
a small group of members from exer- 
cising arbitrary control over the pro- 
ceedings. 

Still another plan which would con- 
tribute much to the efficiency of the 
work of Congress in our opinion 
would be the creation of a co-ordina- 
ting committee consisting of three 
members from both the Senate and 
Hcuse and one to be appointed by 
the Supreme Court but not a member 
of either House. This committee 
should have the power of seeing that 
no action of one body should ever fail 
to obtain due consideration by the 
other body. Thus the wasteful and 
disconcerting situation so often de- 
veloped in our two-chambered legis- 
lative system might be at least 
minimized. 

We urge our readers and friends 
everywhere to do what they can to- 
ward bringing these suggestions to 
the attention of members-elect of the 
64th Congress. 



The New American Government and 
It's Work. By James T. Young, 
Professor of Public Administration, 
Wharton School of Finance and 
Commerce, University of Pennsyl- 
vania. The Macmillan Co., New Tork. 
Price, $2.25; 663 pages. 
That government in this country is 



an evolution, is the fact that is dem- 
onstrated by this book from beginning 
to end. Many writers on government 
and law give the impression that the 
subject is a static rather than a 
dynamic one. There is no stasis in 
Prof. Young's book. He makes gov- 
ernment in this country, both national 
and state, a continuous story, flowing 
easily like a stream, revealing new 
vistas as it flows, yet the same stream 
in its well-worn bed. 

It is interesting to note the many 
differences between the government 
at present and the government in. 
tended by "the fathers." For ex- 
ample, while "the presidential in- 
fluence has increased beyond the 
worst fears of the fathers," the 
text of the constitution remains un- 
changed. 

About half of the book is devoted 
to a very interesting narration of the 
development of our national govern- 
ment. The remainder is given in as 
interesting a way to state govern- 
ment, which is brought completely 
up to date. Professor Young is a 
very attractive writer. The book 
reads like a story, which it is; but it 
also has all the exactness required 
of a text book, which it also is. The 
"New" in the title is justified by the 
showing that in the evolution of 
years, with changing conditions and 
requirements, the government of this 
country, both state and national, has 
become "new." 



Referendum on Preparedness 

The Chamber of Commerce of the 
United States, on motion of the Phila- 
delphia Chamber of Commerce, is 
about to conduct a national referen- 
dum among its members on this ques- 
tion: "Should we prepare ourselves 
against possible attack by a foreign 
enemy?" 



238 

The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department. 

Continuing the Direct Legislation Record, which was the first publication devoted to the Initiative 
and Referendum. It was started in New Jersey, in 1893, by J. W. Sullivan, as the organ for the 
National Direct Legislation League and various State Leagues. It was continued from 1894 to 
1904 by Mr. Eltweed Pomeroy and revived and included in Equity Series in 1906. 

Also continuing the Referendum News, formerly published in Washington, D. C, by Mr. Geo. 
H. Shibley, and consolidated with Equity Series early in 1907. 



[The following challenge to Mr. Taft, in 
the form of an open letter, was sent privately 
to Mr. Taft's New ■ Haven address, then 
to a number of papers throughout the country. 
Mr. Taft's secretary promptly replied that 
Mr. Taft was on the Pacific coast, would 
sail from Los Angeles for New York on 
September 20th, and that he would bring the 
matter to Mr. Taft's attention when he re- 
turned to New Haven, probably about Oct- 
tober 7th. This date would make any reply 
from him too late for this issue of Equity, 
but we hope that the pointedness of this 
challenge, together with its large publicity 
in many papers, and the many editorial 
comments thereon, will bring from Mr. Taft 
a reply directly upon the issue, for the news- 
papers of the country and next issue of 
Equity— C. F. T.] 

$1,000 Reward to Mr. Taft 

(An Open Letter) 
1520 Chestnut St., Phila., Pa. 
September 11, 1915. 

Hon. William H. Taft, LL. D., 

Yale University, 
New Haven, Conn. 

Dear Sir: — The newspapers have 
published very liberal reports of your 
address at Seattle on September 9 
to the American Bankers' Association, 
in which you say that the advocates 
of the Initiative and Referendum pro- 
pose "to dispense with legislative 
agents and let the people legislate 
directly." 

Statements similar to this you have 
made in previous addresses, and I 
have repeatedly tried to bring the 
facts to your attention, apparently 
without success. Now in the hope of 
bringing you to some realization of 
the astounding error contained in 
your Seattle address, I offer you a 
reward of $1,000 (the money to go to 



any worthy charity you may indicate) 
if you will mention any responsible 
advocate of the Initiative and Refer- 
endum with any following worth con- 
sidering, who proposes to "dispense 
with legislative agents and let the 
people legislate directly;" who advo- 
cates the discontinuance of represen- 
tative government in city, state or 
nation, and the replacement therefor 
of direct government by means of the 
Initiative and Referendum; or if you 
will name any book, having any 
standing and which is received as an 
authority on the Initiative and Refer- 
endum, which advocates the destruc- 
tion of representative government and 
its replacement by direct government 
through the Initiative and Refer- 
endum. 

The part of your address referring 
to this subject, as reported in the 
Philadelphia Bulletin of September 9.. 
is as follows: 

"Another most important develop- 
ment in this country has been an at- 
tack upon our representative system 
of government as a cause of the cor- 
porate and corrupt control of politics. 
It was said that the system involved 
the selection of agents by the people 
to act for them in executive and legis- 
lative work who too often proved faith- 
less and that the only method of carry 
ing on the government safely was to 
dispense with legislative agents and 
let the people legislate directly. A 
most formidable wave of public opin- 
ion in favor of such a change swept 
the country and found expression in 
the Initiative and Referendum. After 
a study of the workings of these in- 
novations, I do not hesitate to say 
that it proves the unwisdom of such 
changes." 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



239 



You say that you have made a study 
of the working of "these innovations" 
in this country. But can you point 
to a single state or municipality mak- 
ing use of the Initiative and Refer- 
endum which has dispensed with its 
legislative agents ? Can you point to 
any movement in favor of dispensing 
with legislative agents in city, state 
or nation? 

I have been active and earnest in 
the Initiative and Referendum move- 
ment since its first inception in this 
country in the early 90's. I have 
never met nor heard of any advocate 
of this system who sought the de- 
struction of representative govern- 
ment. We all seek the control of 
representative government by means 
of the Initiative and Referendum in 
order that the chosen legislators shall 
truly represent their constituents. 
We agree with you heartily when 
you say: 

"The system of representative gov- 
ernment is an institution hann 
out in the struggle for Liberty by our 
Anglo-Saxon ancestors for eight hun- 
dred years." 

Nevertheless, is it not true that the 
vast corruption of legislative bodies 
by wealthy and powerful corporations 
and special interests has made plain 
to all that there should be some 
remedy for legislative dishonesty and 
inefficiency? The remedy which the 
Initiative and Referendum offers is 
not the destruction of legislative 
agency, but the control of the acts of 
legislative agents by their principal, 
the Electorate. In private business 
the agent is subject to the control of 
his principal. Why not in public 
business ? 

The representative system of gov- 
ernment is perhaps the most impor- 
tant development in our civilization; 
but without some means of controlling 
it, powerful private interests may and 



do deflect it from its true purpose, the 
public service, ^"ou, yourself, have 
recognized this danger and so have 
the leading men in all parties. It was 
your own distinguished party asso- 
ciate, Hon. Elihu Root, who recently 
told the New York Constitutional 
Convention that the government of 
New York State had been "about as 
representative as the government of 
Venezuela." The Initiative and Re- 
ferendum have come into existence 
because of these now admitted per- 
versions of representative govern- 
ment. They come as instruments to 
prevent the deflection of legislative 
agents from their duty to the public. 
They come to improve and to more 
firmly establish representative govern- 
ment, the most precious inheritance 
of the past. 

I observe that you base your con- 
clusions mainly on "a study of the 
working of these innovations," which 
you say "proves the unwisdom of 
such changes." But so far as report- 
ed, your address contains no facts 
from this great body of experience. 
I am prepared to cite the facts. 

Few laws have been so deliberately 
thought out and so carefully prepared 
as popularly initiated laws. No 
"freak" laws have ever been placed 
upon the statute books by means of 
the Initiative and Referendum. The 
body of laws so made will compare 
very favorably with that created by 
legislatures. The average is really 
superior, and the Referendum has to 
its credit the killing of many unde- 
sirable legislature-made laws. No 
popularly initiated law has ever been 
declared unconstitutional. As a rule 
they are simple, brief and to the 
point. They accomplish just what 
was intended by their sponsors. 

As a rule, the Initiative and Refer- 
endum are included in new charters 
adopted by municipalities. And they 



240 



Equity 



are not abused. It was reported in 
the National Municipal Review for 
October 1914, that of 261 municipali- 
ties known to have these powers, only 
31 had used the Initiative and only 26 
had used the Referendum. The vot- 
ers consider it their natural and 
primary right to retain powers of 
control over their representatives. 
If this had always been done, munic- 
ipal government in this country 
would never have become a disgrace 
to us and a by-word the world over. 
No state or municipality having once 
obtained the Initiative and Referen- 
dum, have ever given them up. 

Mr. Taft, if you will face the well 
known facts, you will never again 
repeat the error mentioned, made in 
your Seattle address. But if you have 
facts not known to others than your- 
self, which b«ar out your statement 
given above and which I challenge, 
produce the facts and claim the re- 
ward, and also the victory. Silence 
will indicate that you cannot "pro- 
duce." There were other glaring 
errors in your Seattle address which 
an ex-^judge, ex-president and a col- 
lege professor should not make. But 
I wish to concentrate attention on the 
above mentioned one in particular, 
as its importance and your frequent 
repetition of it is an injury to the 
cause of popular government, and to 
your own reputation. 

As an ex-president, you are pur- 
suing a dignified and very useful life; 
and you command the respect and 
admiration of all classes. But your 
usefulness is sadly marred by such 
errors as the one above mentioned. 
Why not open your mind to the facts, 
and cease repeating these errors over 
and over to your own detriment? 
Very sincerely yours, 

Charles Fremont Taylor 
* * * 

[The following quotations from an 



address of Mr. Taft to a notable 
gathering of Republicans at Los 
Angeles on Saturday night, Sept. 
18th, further illustrates his persist- 
ence in spreading error. He said: 

The second class of excesses to which 
the seal of the people. In attempting to pre- 
vent a recurrence of corrupt corporate control 
of politics, has carried them has been the 
substitution of what is catted pure or direct 
democracy for tht representative system. 
The referendum, the Initiative and the recall 
have supplanted the old plan of the delegation 
of executive and legislative authority to 
trusted agents who were compelled at regular 
intervals to give an account of their steward- 
ship. 

« * • 

I do not tonight Intend to discuss the 
lack of wisdom in the initiative, referen- 
dum and recall, or to point out by evidence 
accumulating mountain high that legislation 
which is the result of such a system is much 
less expressive of the real will of the majority 
of the people than legislation under the old 
representative system. Ita real result is 
that the legislation of a state is enacted 
not by a majority of voters, but by aa 
actire and organized minority of them. 
The legislation Is not subjected to the 
careful scrutiny of close debate and dis- 
cussion and amendment, but is forced 
down the throats of all the people in an 
undigested mass. 

Any reader of this magazine knows, 
and soon any schoolboy will know, that 
the above statements are absolutely 
erroneous. The Initiative and Refer- 
endum have not "supplanted the old 
plan" in California, and will no:. 
However, these instrumentalities en- 
able the voters to control legislation 
in California. By these means they 
can and do veto the legislation that 
does not please them, and they sup- 
ply directly the legislation that they 
desire if the "trusted agents" have 
not or will not give it. But they do 
not wish to undertake the entire 
of legislating. They want selected 
legislators to do it for them, but they 
retain the very reasonable right of 
review. The representative >y 
is entirely too precious to dis< 
Those who perfect it by compelling it 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



241 



to remain true to its purpose are its 
best friends. 

The results of the operation of the 
I. and R. have been excellent. We 
ask Mr. Taft to give us some of his 
"mountain high" evidence that it is 
"much less expressive of the real 
will of the majority of the people 
than legislation under the old repre- 
sentative system." How can it be 
"less expressive, etc.," when it ia 
done by direct action and must neces- 
sarily express the will of those who 
thus act? I. and R. measures receive 
extra careful scrutiny instead of less 
scrutiny. The statement that it is 
"forced down the throats of all the 
people" is too ridiculous for reply. 

If Mr. Taft believes what he is say- 
ing, let him start a movement to have 
the I. and R. killed in California and 
in the cities and towns in California, 
and seo where he will land. We chal- 
lenge him to do this. See in the I. 
and R. news department of this issue 
what use California is now making 
of the I. and R. Next issue will give 
the result of the votes on the meas- 
ures submitted. If Mr. Taft will 
have submitted the proposition to do 
away with the I. and R. in California, 
we will be glad to publish the vote 
on it. Of course the voters of Cali- 
fornia would overwhelmingly defeat 
such a proposition, as they would de- 
feat a proposition to do away with 
the legislature — which Mr. Taft says 
they have already done, and which 
everybody in California knows is an 
error.— C, F. T.] 



NOT ABOLISHING LEGISLATURE 



A Timely Letter from the Governor 
of Arizona, Nailing a False Report 

Shortly after the Taft letter went 
out, we received a clipping of quite 
an unusual character from a paper 
published in a small town (population 



1318) in Minnesota. Our associate 
editor immediately sent the clipping, 
with a letter, to Governor Hunt, of 
Arizona, asking for further informa- 
tion. The following letter received 
from Governor Hunt just before we 
go to press tells the whole story: 

Executive Office, State House, 

Phoenix, Arizona, 

October 5th, 1915. 
My dear Mr. Potter: 

After reading your letter of the 29th 
ultimo I desire to assure you of my 
appreciation of your courtesy in bring- 
ing- to my attention the statement clip- 
ped from an editorial in the Dawson 
(Minn.) Sentinel, to the effect that 
"the people of Arizona are considering' 
abolishing the state legislature and 
relying on the initiative and referen- 
dum for all legislation." 

While it may, of course, be true that 
certain ultraradical people residing in 
this state have broached such a prop- 
osition as the foregoing, it most as- 
suredly has not been seriously con- 
sidered by any great number of this 
state's citizens. The vast majority of 
the people of this state recognize, as I 
believe, that the best purpose of the 
initiative and referendum is to act as 
a check upon and supplementary to the 
Stat-- Legislature. There have, how- 
been wide spread expressions of 
Ction concerning legislative 
work during the past several years, 
and a proposition to adopt the uni- 
cameral system has received much at- 
tention. The advocates of the one- 
house-legislature evidently believe 
that the retention of two legislative 
branches encourages the evasion of 
responsibility and the delay of im- 
portant public work. 

Trusting that the information con- 
herein will satisfy your inquiry, 
Yours sincerely, 

GEO. W. P. HUNT, 

Governor of Arizona- 
Mr. Edwin S. Potter, 

Associate Editor, "Equity," 

Philadelphia, Pa. 

It is erroneously construed by a 
few uninformed persons that the 
growing movement for unicameral 
legislatures is a movement in opposi- 
tion to representative government. 



242 



Equity 



Indeed it is in favor of a more con- 
centrated and responsible form of 
representative government. And it 
is not new. The first legislatures of 
Pennsylvania, Georgia and Vermont 
were single chambered, the latter one 
remaining so until 1836. The board 
of directors of private corporations, 
which is the legislative body, is al- 
ways unicameral. All of our consti- 
tutional conventions have been uni- 
cameral. The new commission plan 
of governing municipalities is uni- 
cameral. 

The reason that the British parlia- 
ment is bicameral is because the 
House of Lords represents the 
"classes," while the House of Com- 
mons represents the "masses." The 
reason that our Congress is bicam- 
eral is that the Senate repre- 
sents the states, and the House repre- 
sents the people, being based on popu- 
lation. There is no reason why the 
legislatures of states should be bi- 
cameral. But the point here is, that 
both the unicameral and bicameral 
systems are representative; and an 
effort to change the legislature of a 
state from the bicameral to the uni- 
cameral plan is not a movement 
against representative government. It 
does not contemplate "abolishing the 
state legislature." — Editor. 

Enemies of I. and R. Challenged 

The daily newspapers of September 
23 and 24 very generally published a 
report sent out from Washington, D- 
C, telling of a formal challenge to 
debate, issued by the National Pop- 
ular Government League to the re- 
cently organized "National Associa- 
tion for Constitutional Government," 
of which David Jayne Hill is the 
active head, and which includes in its 
membership former Senator Root, 
former President Taft and many of 
the reactionary or standpat group. 
Senator Owen, as president of the 



Popular Government League is named 
as the defender of the I. and R. The 
letter is so good that we present it 
in full, as follows: 
NATIONAL POPULAR GOVERN- 
MENT LEAGUE. 
602 Munsey Bldg., 

Washington, D. C. 

September 22, 1915. 
Hon. David Jayne Hill, 
Chairman of the General Committee, 
National Association for Constitutional 
Government, Colorado Bldg., Washing- 
ton, D. C. 
Dear Sir: — 

We note with interest the organization 
of the General Committee of the National 
Association for Constitutional Govern- 
ment, of which you are Chairman, and 
of which former President Taft, Hon. 
Alton B. Parker and Ex-senator Julius 
C. Burrows are distinguished members. 
It is interesting also to note that your 
purpose is " earnestly approved' 1 by 
Senator Elihu Root in his letter sent out 
with your literature. 

We are in cordial agreement with 
your declared general purpose of uphold- 
ing constitutional government, and of 
preserving our representative institutions. 
We are in disagreement, at least to some 
extent, as to the method by which to 
achieve this end. 

We favor what we term "the Gc 
amendment." That is, a means of 
making the federal constitution sub- 
stantially easier of amendment. 

We believe the initiative, referendum 
and recall (in workable form) are 
sary — at least in ou 

to make representative government repre- 
sentative of the people rather than of 
special interests. 

You oppose the Gateway amendment. 
You take no clear stand with regard to 
other measures : regard essential 

for the adequate protection of our funda- 
mental rights of life, liberty and prop- 
erty. You fail even to mention the 
initio: We 

regret this vagueness. It leaves us no 
means of knowing your purposes re- 
garding these measi. 

of your committee- Stf far 

as they are kno:. 

opposed to them. We are the 
compelled to infer I 
Hon ;;. 

ative, referendum and 
probably oppose these measures, 
desire to be corrected if wrong in this 
inference. 



The Initiative. Referendum and Recall Department 



243 



So far as you are specific, you speak 
of the federal constitution in the words 
"the existing method of amending it 
being deemed wise and adequate." We 
hold that the present method is so cumber- 
some and restricted as to endanger 
peaceful progress because it permits a 
small but powerful privileged minority 
to indefinitely block the adoption of 
changes necessary to the general welfare, 
long after such changes are demanded 
by a majority of the people. It took 
ninety years to secure the direct election 
of United States Senators, and it took 
eighteen years of fighting to get the income 
Tax amendment, during which time the 
wealth of the nation escaped taxation in 
support of the national government in a 
sum estimated at not less than two 
billion dollars. 

In a word, we propose to strengthen 
representative government by inc\ 
the people's com 

correctly i >>/, oppose 

giving further power to the voters, and 
favor government by elective oligarchies, 
recklessly left exposed, as at present, to 
control h_. influences. 

Assuming that we are right in this 
estimate of your purposes, we wish, in 
the public interest, to take issue squarely 
with you on these principles of popular 
government, and challenge you publicly 
to debate either or both of the following 
questions at suck time and place as may 
be agreed upon: 

First. Resolved that the initi 
referendum and recall are a fulfillment of, 
and not in conflict with, the principle 
upon which the American government is 
founded, and that their adoption is ad- 
visable. 

ond. Resolved, that the existing 
method of amending the federal con- 
stitution is not wise or adequate. 

The affirmative of these propositions 
will be maintained by Senator Robert L. 
Owen, President of the National Popu- 
lar Government League, and you are 
asked to defend the position taken by 
your organization through an advocate 
chosen by yourselves, preferably Senator 
Elihu Root, Hon. Alton B. Parker or 
Prof. W. H. Taft. 

Awaiting with interest your reply, 
we are, 

Respectfully yours, 
Frank P. Walsh, 
Lewis J. Johnson, 
A . J. Mc Kelway, 
Geo. W. N orris. 

Executive Committee. 
By Judson King, Executive Sec'y. 



Chamber of Commerce Referendum 

In the July Equity (page 207) a 
statement was made concerning the 
sending out of ballots by the Na- 
tional Chamber of Commerce for a 
referendum vote of its organization 
members on various aspects of the 
proposition to build a permanent 
American merchant marine. Since 
that time the national office at Wash- 
ington has received and tabulated 
the vote on the questions thus sub- 
mitted as follows: 

(1) "Do you favor the Government under- 
taking the purchase, construction, or charter 
of vessels for mercantile purposes, together 
with the operation of such vessels?" 

In favor, 89; opposed, 688. 

(2) "Do you favor ownership of merchant 
vessels by the Government, but with opera- 
tion by private parties under leases?" 

In favor, 51; opposed, 711. 

(3) " Do you favor subsidies from the Gov- 
ernment sufficient to offset the difference in 
cost between operation of vessels under the 
American flag and operation in the same deep 
sea trades under foreign flags?" 

In favor, 553; opposed, 188. 

(4) "Do you favor subventions from the 
Government to establish regular mail and 
freight lines under the American flag to coun- 
tries in which the commercial interests of the 
United States are important, and to American 
dependencies?" 

In favor, 711; opposed, 52. 

We are now authoritatively inform- 
ed by the editors of the Nation's 
Business, the national organ of the 
National Chamber of Commerce, that 
there are at the present time 673 
local chambers of commerce or other 
business organizations affiliated with 
the national body, and that these 
organizations represent in their local- 
ity not less than 300,000 business 
men. The above recorded vote on the 
questions affecting the merchant 
marine are the votes cast by organi- 
zations, but under the rules of the 
national organization each local 
chamber is entitled to from one to 
ten votes according to the number of 



244 



Equity 



its own membership. Any local or- 
ganization has the privilege of pro- 
posing a subject for a referendum 
vote of the national chamber. The 
question so proposed is then printed 
by the Board of Directors with such 
arguments as may be presented by 
the proposing member, with the one 
limitation that subjects considered 
must be national in character. If the 
directors decide that the question 
submitted is not national in charac- 
ter the proposing member may appeal 
to the National Council, and if the 
Council decides by a majority vote 
that the question should be referred 
to the membership, the directors must 
order its submission. 

Thereupon the General Secretary 
mails the ballot and accompanying 
arguments to all organization mem- 
bers who are permitted to express theiu 
opinion in writing within 45 days. If 
before the expiration of that time 
more than two-thirds of the voting 
strength of the organization member- 
ship are registered in favor of the 
proposition, the directors shall de- 
clare that the question has been ap- 
proved by the chamber. If at the 
expiration of 45 days one-third of the 
voting strength of the chamber has 
been recorded and two-thirds of the 
votes thus cast, representing at least 
20 states, is in favor of the proposi- 
tion, the General Secretary shall so 
certify and the question shall be re- 
corded as having been passed. 

But if the number of votes cast is 
less than one-third of the chamber 
but has received the approval of more 
than one-third of the votes cast on the 
proposition the question may be sub- 
mitted for further consideration on 
the following plan: 

(a) The opinions received from the various 
organization members shall be put in type and 
referred to the proposing member, said member 
shall have an opportunity to consider them and 
to add a final argument in support of its pro- 



ject, of such length as the Board of Direc ii 
shall prescribe. 

(b) All of these opinions shall be assemt ed 
in a printed pamphlet, a copy of which shall be 
forwarded to each organization member and 
to each National Councillor. 

(c) On receipt of the pamphlet it shall be 
the duty of each organization member to con- 
sider the whole project in the light of the 
opinions expressed in all parts of the country, 
and to register a definite vote on the proposi- 
tion within 45 days of the date of mailing of 
pamphlet. One vote may be cast for each 
delegate to which the memoer ie entitled in 
the annual meeting. 

If on this second consideration by 
mail the proposition fails to receive 
the vote necessary for its passage 
but receives one-third of the votes 
cast, it shall be placed upon the pro- 
gram for consideration at the next 
annual meeting. 

From these regulations it is seen 
that this great national organization 
of business men does not hesitate to 
record its approval of any proposition 
subject to a referendum vote even 
though the number of organization 
members voting is only one-third of 
the voting strength of the chamber, 
provided a two-thirds majority of 
those voting is recorded. The votes 
of all of those organizations which 
fail to express an opinion in such a 
case are not counted as against the 
proposition. Thus the National Cham- 
ber of Commerce emphasizes the prin- 
ciple of the Referendum by which the 
prevailing opinion of the membership 
may be actually obtained. 



Stability Under the Initiative 

Should the same issue, after being 
decided by a majority vote at the 
polls, be continually forced upon the 
voters for repeated decisions without 
limit under the operation of the 
Initiative ? 

This question is now presented to 
the people of Ohio in the form of a 
proposed amendment to the state con- 
stitution, which will go on the ballot 






The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



245 



in November by initiative petition. 
This proposed amendment was father- 
ed by an organization known as the 
Constitutional Stability League, with 
headquarters at Columbus, and evi- 
dently financed and equipped for a 
vigorous campaign. The text of the 
ir.cr.sure is as follows: 

No amendment of the Constitution 
shall be submitted to the electors which 
involves any proposal or part of any 
Proposal which, since September 4, 
1912, shall have been rejected more 
than once by the electors, unless six 
years shall have elapsed since the last 
rejection. 

The sponsors of this proposition 
have filed their petition with 175,861 
signatures of voters, or 62,932 more 
than necessary. They say that the 
signatures were obtained in about 
two weeks and that many of the 
signers were in the rural counties as 
well as in the big centers like Cin- 
cinnati and Cleveland. Their argu- 
ment for this limitation of the Initia- 
tive is that it is "in response to tho 
popular sentiment for a rest from 
continued agitation by a minority of 
the voters on the same subject." They 
think it reasonable, after it has been 
shown twice that a majority of the 
voters are against the proposition, 
"to exact from its supporters that an 
interval of six years from the last 
rejection shall elapse before the mat- 
ter can be voted on again." It is 
urged that movers of twice defeated 
amendments "show a defiance of the 
popular will by calling for a vote 
again and again." 

Now that this issue is fairly and 
squarely raised by the voters of Ohio, 
it must be met by the friends of 
popular government everywhere. The 
position of Equity in regard to it was 
first definitely formulated in the Jan. 
uary, 1914, number, in the article en- 
titled "The Progressive Party and the 



I. R. and R." There, on page 22, oc- 
curred the following question and 
answer: 

Should there be any limitation upon 
the frequency of submission of the 
same question by the Initiative? 

Here I differ from most of my 
friends who have been zealous work- 
ers for the Initiative. I believe that 
after the voters have settled a ques- 
tion by direct vote it should remain 
settled for a reasonable period — say 
about four years. 

It is not because we have once 
committed Equity to this view that we 
reaffirm it now, but because we think 
it good public policy that decisions by 
direct vote should be reasonably 
stable. Constant agitation and re- 
submission at every election we con- 
sider hurtful to the idea of reasonable 
stability in government. Yet we con- 
sider a six-year period of stasis rath- 
er too long, in these times of rapid 
changes in conditions. Our idea in fix- 
ing the four year period was to per- 
mit one biennial election to intervene 
between resubmissions of the same 
subject. We think that this position 
is at once reasonably conservative 
and reasonably progressive. 

The Ohio proposition aims at any 
proposal which has already been re- 
jected more than once since Septem- 
ber 4, 1912. That limits this proposi- 
tion at present to some phase of the 
liquor question, which is a constant 
disturber in politics. Hereafter, the 
principle will apply generally, and it 
would be better to decrease the stasis 
period from six years to four, or not 
oftener than at an alternating bi- 
ennial election. 

The report is circulated that the 
Constitutional Stability League is in 
reality the organ of the liquor inter- 
ests, though the officers of the league 
insist that the movement is strictly 
ncn-partisan and assert that many 
supporters of the I. and R. are with 
them. 



246 



Equity 



But the stand taken and now re- 
affirmed by Equity, regardless of 
which side of the liquor or any other 
question is behind the Ohio proposal, 
is on the principle involved. We are 
for it in principle and believe that a 
4-year interval for the resubmission 
of questions twice voted on would in- 
ciease respect for the Initiative and 
make it more useful. But we advise 
our readers to oppose the present 
proposition in Ohio because the in- 
terval of six years is too long. 



Easier Impeachment and the Recall 

"Settling important questions on 
the street corner simply tends to re- 
move the protection afforded by or- 
derly government and prevents clear 
and dispassionate conclusions." This 
the picturesque but misleading re- 
mark from the Washington Post con- 
cerning the operation of the Recall. 
Like a great many of the ultra con- 
servative papers, the Post was pleas- 
ed with the statement made by Sen- 
ator Root at Albany that "it is the 
inadequacy of the remedy of im- 
peachment which has lead to the 
widespread demand for the Recall." 
Hence its denunciation of the Recall 
as "street-corner" government. 

The street corner plays an impor- 
tant part, and properly, in the forma- 
tion of public opinion under demo- 
cratic institutions. There citizens 
touch elbows, overhear discussions or 
listen to "soap-boxers," on all sides 
of pending issues. But all this ap- 
plies quite as much to the regular 
election of officials as it does, under 
the Recall, to a demand for the re- 
tirement of an official before the end 
of his term. 

The system of direct popular con- 
trol of public officials, which is now 
incorporated in the constitutions of 
ten states and in the charters of over 



300 American municipalities, is quite 
as deliberate and orderly a process 
as any other public function in which 
the voters participate. And the act- 
ual test of experience shows that the 
Recall has been used in most cases 
with great caution and conservatism. 
The state-wide Recall has never yet 
been used at all and only about 10 
per cent, of the municipalities having 
the power have resorted to it. The 
mere existence of this power has 
caused better service on the part of 
elected officials, and the suggestion of 
the use of the Recall has served to 
cause incompetent or corrupt officials 
to resign. 

But granting that the Root plan 
for making the process of impeach- 
ment easier and less expensive shall 
become general in our states; is that 
a good reason why the voters, in their 
sovereign capacity, should not retain, 
as a proper means of self-protection, 
the power to express their will as to 
the fitness of any afficial, whose fit- 
ness has been seriously questioned, to 
continue in that capacity? Nc mat- 
ter how easy the process of impeach- 
ment might be made by the Root 
plan or any other, its operation would 
still be subject to the judgment and 
will of indirect agencies, namely, the 
men chosen to represent the public 
instead of the public itself. Perhaps 
they would do their duty in a large 
majority of cases. But of this the 
people can have no positive assur- 
ance. The only practicable way for 
the people to be duly protected is for 
them to reserve in their fundamental 
law the self-evident right and power 
to express directly at the polls their 
approval or disapproval of any official 
against whom charges of improper 
conduct have been preferred by a con- 
siderable number of voters, or whose 
avowed policy causes general dis- 
satisfaction. 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



247 



REFERENDUM AND AVAR 



Letter from an Ex-Associate Editor 
of Equity 

20 Harbord Street, Toronto, Can., 

October 8th, 1915. 

My Dear Doctor: — I was much struck 
by your view expressed in "The 
Medical World," that the cause of 
every war is bad government — to 
which may be added bad governmental 
methods, which I presume is included 
in your phrase. 

Bulgaria and Greece at the present 
time afford striking examples of this 
principle. A few men are in power, 
and they decide the destinies of the 
nation, irrespective of what the major- 
ity of the people desire. Even where 
the real power resides in the House 
of Commons, it may be thwarted by 
not calling the House together, provid- 
ing the power to do so is really nut- 
side the House; or if power is divided, 
the King and his advisers can 
manoeuver so as to have things their 
own way. However, Britain is a fine 
example of real parliamentary govern- 
ment. 

The foregoing is rather in the nature 
of preliminary talk. What I wanted to 
deal with is the absolute necessity 
of a preferential factor if a nation in 
its constitution has the use of the 
Initiative and Referendum to decide 
the question of peace or war, because 
the third question — which side to fight 
on — would come in if war were rag- 
ing between other Powers; and there 
might be even another question. For 
instance, suppose the people of Greece 
or Bulgaria were voting on what the 
nation should do in the circumstances 
of a week or so ago. The issue would 
be as indicated above. A majority, 
not a mere plurality, should decide 
this: and the result would be decisive 
if each voter had a first, second, and 
third choice. A fourth choice might 
be required, for instance, on mobiliza- 
tion or the action to be taken in some 
probable eventuality. 

Yours in haste, 

Robert Tyson. 
Dr. C. F. Taylor. 

* * * 

In this connection, please see sign- 
ed paragraph displayed across page 



of. Mr. Bryan's Commoner, reduced 
and reproduced here: 

Write and Write Now 
The power to declare war is vested 
in congress — that is the nearest body 
to the people. The referendum was then 
unknown — if the constitution was be- 
ing written today the people would 
probably be given a referendum vote 
on war, and women — the greatest suf- 
ferers from war — would doubtless be 
given a voice. But as we do not have 
a direct referendum we should use 
every means we do have to impress up- 
on senators and members of congress 
the fact that the people are opposed to 
entering: the present war: They are in 
favor of using the peace treaty plan 
to preserve peace, and, if that fails, 
they are in favor of postponing final 
settlement until this war is over. This 
course will enable us to assist as 
mediator in bringing this war to a 
close and then we shall have no diffi- 
culty in adjusting our differences*. 
Write your Senators and your Con- 
gressmen, protesting against war. 
They will listen to you. 

W. J. BRYAN. 

Concerning war referenda we wish 
to say that the danger of a sudden 
and unexpected onslaught, as in 
Europe in 1914, and the publicity and 
delay necessarily involved in a nation- 
wide referendum, militate strongly 
against the plan, however just in es- 
sence the plan may be. War is a 
demon that must be dealt with ac- 
cording to his- infernal nature — until 
we can destroy the beast by means 
of intelligent world organization. In 
the meantime, let us have referenda 
when demanded, on measures that 
may become causes of war if not set- 
tled in accordance with public opin. 



"It is a universal practice in the 
popular elections in all these States to 
give no legal consideration whatever 
to those who do not choose to vote, 
as against the effect of the votes of 
those who do choose to vote. Hence 
it is not the qualified voters, but the 
qualified voters who choose to vote, 
that constitute the political power of 
the State." — From President Lincoln's opinion 
on admission of West Virginia. 



248 



Equity 



The March of 
Popular Government 



Arkansas 

About 4000 signatures more than 
necessary to initiate an amendment 
in Arkansas, which is sponsored by 
the State Federation of Labor to be 
voted on next year, have already been 
obtained in support of the proposed 
substitute for the existing Initiative 
and Referendum amendment (adopt- 
ed in 1910). Mr. L. H. Moore, sec- 
retary-treasurer of this federation, 
writes that before the time expires in 
which they can add signatures to the 
petitions for this amendment they 
hope to have 8000 or 10,000 more 
names so as to allow for insufficiency 
in case the petitions are challenged 
at the last moment. The principal 
features of this proposed substitute 
were reported on pages 110 and 111 
of the April, 1915, Equity. Instead 
of the percentage basis for petitions, 
a definite number is proposed, 10,000 
voters for" the state-wide Initiative 
and 7,000 for the state-wide Referen- 
dum. The percentage basis is retain- 
ed for municipalities, 10 per cent, for 
the Initiative and 15 per cent, for the 
Referendum. This amendment would 
prevent the legislature from amend- 
ing or repealing a law voted by the 
people, except by a three-fourths 
vote of the members. Nor could the 
supreme court invalidate an initiated 
measure unless by a unanimous opin- 
ion. One of the important objects of 
this amendment is to remove the 
limitation as to the number of amend- 
ments that may be submitted at one 
election, which is now three. It also 
changes the "majority of all votes 
cast" requirement on legislative 
amendments to "a majority of the 
votes cast therieon," thus harmon- 



izing in this important respect, 
amendments submitted by the popular 
Initiative. 

California 

Shall all party designations be 
stricken from the ballots for state, 
county and municipal elections and 
the ballots contain only the titles of 
the offices to be filled and the list 
of candidates named? 

This is the overshadowing issue 
presented to the electorate of Cali- 
fornia in the two so-called "non- 
partisan" acts (passed by the last 
legislature and which are to be sub- 
mitted by referendum petition to the 
voters at the coming special election 
(Oct. 26) along with nine amend- 
ments submitted by the legislature 
itself. At one stage of the campaign 
it was feared that these referendum 
propositions would necessitate an- 
other special election, at great addi- 
tional expense to the state. But 
Governor Johnson avoided this ob- 
stacle by simply having the non- 
partisan acts submitted on the same 
day that the legislature had called 
the special election for its submis- 
sions. 

The non-partisan acts were ex- 
plained briefly in the July Equity, 
page 185; and also the gist of the 
nine constitutional amendments to be 
submitted on Oct. 26 was given. The 
non-partisan acts are part of the 
program of the Johnson Progressive 
party administration and they have 
been assailed bitterly by all the old 
party leaders and are opposed bv 
some of the leading Progressives. 
Under the Direct Primary law of 1913 
about 2300 local and state officials, 
were placed on the non-partisan basis 
of election. The acts of the 1915 
legislature adds to this list 120 mem- 
bers of the legislature, four members 
of the State Board of Equilization 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



249 



and seven State officers, as follows: 
governor, lieutenant-governor, secre- 
tary of state, treasurer, controller, 
attorney general and surveyor gen- 
eral. But that is as far as the non- 
partisan program goes, for the custom- 
ary party designations are provided 
for on the ballots used in the election 
of United States senators, representa- 
tives in Congress, party committee- 
men, delegates to national party con- 
ventions and presidential electors. 
Any one may compete for an office at 
the primary but the two having the 
highest will go on the ballot at the 
election. But if any candidate gets a 
majority at the primary his name 
will be the only one on the ballot at 
the general election. 

It is clear that these laws aim to 
prevent the use of national party 
organizations in determining state 
and local issues. If further assur- 
ance were needed that the purpose of 
them is not to destroy national par- 
ties, it may be found in the fact that 
these laws provide for party registra- 
tion. On this point we quote a por- 
tion of the remarks of Lieut. Gover- 
nor Eshelman, made at San Francisco 
recently and reported in the San 
Francisco Bulletin, as follows: 

The fundamental fallacy that we find in 
the argument of those who insist upon party 
lines in State, county, cities and townships is 
in their belief that the primary consideration 
of government is to elect men to office. Gov- 
ernment is, and always should be, utterly un- 
concerned about the individual who is elected 
to office. What government desires and what 
the people have a right to expect is efficient 
public service. And when any other than 
the personal fitness of the candidate for the 
office is applied, then we have a false issue and 
we have an unjustifiable method of selection. 

These men who oppose these non-partisan 
measures do not like the destruction of the 
county ring. They do not like the destruction 
of the city ring. They would restore, if they 
could, the old county ring and the old city 
ring. 

No, my friend, these bills will not destroy 
partisanship; rather, they will confine the 
partisanship to its legitimate field, and that is 



the reason we find all the old gang of the old 
exploiters out because never is it satisfactory to 
them to contemplate the election of a man 
because of his fitness rather than his fealty to 
them. 

If the nonpartisan laws shall be 
sustained by a majority vote thereon 
at the election now at hand, the 
state of California will have pioneer- 
ed the path to a new and advanced 
position among the states. Her ex- 
perience in thus attempting to pre- 
vent national party machinery from 
interfering with the free play of pub- 
lic opinion on men and measures in 
state and local contests will be watch- 
ed with deep interest by the whole 
nation. 

Among the nine measures submit- 
ted by the legislature, the one that 
particularly interests us is the one 
seeking to further safeguard the peti- 
tions used under the I. and R. It al- 
so would require a two-thirds major- 
ity to authorize a bond issue under 
the Initiative. 

The grand jury of San Diego, in a 
recent report to the county judge, 
referred to the council's abuse of the 
emergency clause under the I. and 
R. in the city charter, as follows: 

Direct legislation is one of the great safe- 
guards of democracy and the attempt to avoid 
the use of the referendum by the declaration 
that an emergency, as defined by the statutes 
or charter exists, when none does exist, is 
highly reprehensible, and is, as recently judi- 
cially declared, a reflection either upon the 
intelligence or integrity of the common council. 

Florida 

The picturesque old city of St. 
Augustine, where the first permanent 
( Spanish ) settlement was made on the 
North American continent, is now in 
the front rank of municipal progress 
with a brand new charter providing 
for the commission-manager form of 
government, including the Initiative, 
Referendum and Recall. This char- 
ter was drafted by the St. Augustine 
Chamber of Commerce, and after be- 



250 



Equity 



ing enacted by the last legislature 
was ratified by the voters of the city 
and went into effect July 14th. 

The plan of the Initiative in this 
charter permits ordinances to be pro- 
posed by petition signed by 5 per cent, 
of the voters. But if the commission 
fails to take the action thus proposed, 
an additional 5 per cent, of the voters, 
by signing a petition, may compel the 
submission of the proposition to the 
electorate. The Referendum is made 
available by a 15 per cent, petition 
of voters. It is also made applicable 
to initiated ordinances passed by the 
commission. The Recall may be 
started on the petition of 200 voters 
containing a 200-word statement of 
the reasons for the proposed recall. 
The official thus assailed may within 
five days file a defensive statement of 
200 words which the clerk must at- 
tach to petitions then to be placed on 
file in his office for 30 days, where 
voters must come to sign it. If 20 
per cent, of the voters sign the Re- 
call petition, an election is ordered un- 
less the assailed official resigns. The 
decision of the voters in all cases is 
by a majority on the proposition. 

Maine 

Despite the fact that the city of 
Bangor had voted, 2,454 to 1,983, in 
favor of a commission form of gov- 
ernment with the preferential ballot, 
the legislature at the last moment 
refused to grant such a charter to 
that city! 

Maryland 

As the time draws near for the 
submission of the Referendum amend- 
ment to the voters of Maryland, con- 
fidence in its adoption by a large 
majority increases. This confidence 
has been much strengthened by the 
action of both party conventions in 
indorsing this amendment. The situ- 



ation is well stated in a letter which 
we have received from our editorial 
counsellor, Mr. Jackson Ralston, who 
has taken a leading part in the cam- 
paign for the Referendum amend- 
ment. It is as follows: 

Washington, D. C, 

September 27, 1915. 
Dr. C. F. Taylor, 

Philadelphia, Pa. 
Dear Sir: 

The Maryland Democratic State 
Convention, held last Wednesday, and the 
Republican State Convention, held Thurs- 
day, each indorsed and recommended 
the referendum amendment submitted to 
be voted on at the general election to 
be held in November. If any doubt 
had existed before of the ratification by 
the people of the Maryland Referendum 
Amendment, it was dissipated by the action 
of these conventions. We are now justi- 
fied in expecting a heavy majority for the 
proposition. At the same time both con- 
ventions indorsed what is known as the 
County Home Rule amendment, under 
the terms of which each county will at- 
tend to its own local government, with 
an initiative on the part of the local 
voters, enabling them to change their 
county government within certain limit- 
ations, as they see fit. 

In addition the Democratic State Con- 
vention indorsed the constitutional amend- 
ment providing for the classification of prop- 
erty for purposes of taxation, under which 
taxation is to be uniform on land, and with- 
in such classes or sub-classes of improve- 
ment or personal property as the taxation 
authority shall direct to be subject to 
taxation. 

Our feeling is that these amendments 
will make Maryland the most progressive 
state east of the Mississippi River, and 
their adoption will justify us in anticipating 
favorable action on a state- wide ini: 
amendment to be proposed at the coming 
session of the legislature. 

Very truly yours. 
J. H. Ra 

The Direct Legislation League of 
Maryland has been doing valiant ser- 
vice in this campaign under the direc- 
tion of Mr. Ralston as president and 
Mr. Chas. J. Ogle of Baltimore, as 
secretary. The slogan of this body 
is: 'The Rights of the People are safe 
with the People." 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



251 



Four amendments will be on the bal- 
lot in Maryland, at the coming elec- 
tion, as follows: for home rule in 
counties and in Baltimore, with pro- 
vision for the Initiative; for the Ref- 
erendum, on the basis of a petition 
signed by 10,000 voters; for the 
classification of property for tax- 
ation; for the indeterminate sentence 
and suspension of sentence in crim- 
inal cases. 

Mr. Ogle writes us that the City- 
Wide Congress, a federation of civic 
associations in Baltimore are actively 
cooperating in the campaign for these 
amendments. Assistance is also be- 
ing given by labor unions, granges 
and farmers' clubs. Let us all be pre- 
pared to swing our hats for Mary- 
land when the word comes of another 
state won to the cause of the people 
on Nov. 2. The text of the Maryland 
Referendum amendment will be print- 
ed in the next Equity, if it be 
adopted. The main . features of it 
were noted in July, 1914, E< 
page 13(5. 

Massachusetts 

The optional city charter act, which 
was adopted by the 1915 legislature 
of Massachusetts and which went into 
effect on June 1, contains provision 
for the I. and R. in all of the four 
plans thus made available. The 
Initiative is made operative on the 
filing of petitions signed by 8 per 
cent, of the voters for a regular elec- 
tion, but by 20 per cent, of the voters 
to compel submission at a special 
election. The Referendum is opera- 
tive on a 12 per cent, basis. 

Minnesota 

In the article entitled "The Rule 
of the Ignorant," printed elsewhere 
in this issue will be found a 
full discussion of the situation in 



Minnesota where the people are fac- 
ing another campaign for the I. and 
R. under a serious handicap. It 
points the way to this great state's 
emancipation. 

The first and second choice system 
of preferential voting in the election 
of state officials, which was adopted 
by the Minnesota legislature of 1913, 
has been repealed by this year's legis- 
lature. And now comes the decision 
of the state Supreme Court invalida- 
ting the election of a judge for the 
city of Duluth because under the ex- 
isting city charter said election was 
conducted on the preferential plan. 
In reference to this case the 
Minneapolis Tribune of July 31 says: 

In case of the Duluth charter, all candidates go 
upon the official ballot by petition. The 
ballot provides for first choice, second choice 
and a Mitional choice votes. If the result of 
the first choice is a majority for the candidate 
he is elected. If the first choice vote failed to 
bring him a majority, the second choice votes 
are then added, and then if there is not a major- 
ity the first and second choice votes are added 
to the additional choice votes, and the candi- 
date having a plurality is elected. Each voter 
may vote as many additional choice votes as 
he chooses less the first and second choice 
votes, that is, he may vote as many additional 
choice votes as there are candidates, less two. 
"When the constitution was framed," says 
the supreme court, "and as used in it, the word 
'vote' meant a choice for a candidate by one 
constitutionally qualified to exercise a choice. 
Since then it has meant nothing else. It was 
never meant that the ballot of one elector, 
cast for one candidate, could be of greater or 
less effect than the ballot of another elector 
cast for another candidate. The preferential 
system directly diminishes the right of an 
elector to give an effective vote for the candi- 
date of his choice. If he votes for him once 
his power to help him is exhausted. If he 
votes for other candidates he may harm his 
choice but cannot help him. The mathemati- 
cal possibilities of the application of the system 
to different situations are infinite." 

In offering a dissent to the majority opinion 
of the court, Justice Hallam bases his position 
largely on previous opinions of the court re- 
lating to the legality of the Duluth charter 
and other elections held under it. In each 
case the legality of the charter was upheld 
and the elections under it held proper. 



252 



Equity 



Mississippi 

Under the guidance and inspiration 
of the National Popular Government 
League, a campaign has been started 
in Mississippi to elect a majority of 
the next legislature committed to the 
proposition that the I. and R. amend- 
ment submitted to the voters, last 
year, was not defeated, as officially 
reported, but was in fact adopted 
and should be inserted in the consti- 
tution by legislative act, as required 
in the constitution of the state. 

The vote on this amendment on 
Nov. 3, 1914, was 19,118 for to 8,718 
against. Highest vote on candidates, 
according to the official returns, was 
37,583. Hence the amendment re- 
ceived a majority of all the votes 
cast at the election, as required by 
the constitution. An unofficial and 
"corrected" report was given out by the 
secretary of state at 39,375, on which 
basis the amendment was reported 
as lost. Hence the fight for the right 
kind of legislators. 

Missouri 

How the framers of the new St 
Louis charter (adopted by the peo- 
ple June 30, 1914) aimed to give 
elasticity to the operation of the 
Initiative and Referendum features is 
made clear in a letter from Wilbur 
B. Jones, who was secretary of the 
Board of Freeholders which drew 
that charter, as follows: 

St. Louis, July 26, 1915. 
Charles Fremont Taylor, 

Philadelphia, Pa. 
Dear Dr. Taylor: — 

Owing to the press of other 
matters, I had not had an opportunity until 
last night to read the April number of 
"Equity." I noticed therein an inter- 
esting article on Page 91 entitled "Inel- 
asticity of the Initiative." In said article, 
at the bottom of the first column of page 
92, I find the following statement: 
"Provision could be made for enabling the 
Legislature to make amendments subject 
to the approval of the sponsors of a pro- 



posed law. In this wise the initiative 
process can be made more elastic." 

You will remember me as the secretary 
of the Board of Freeholders, who drafted 
the new charter for the city of St. Louis, 
which was adopted by vote of the people 
June 30, 1914. You will remember that 
while we were drafting said charter we con- 
sulted you with regard to certain provisions 
on direct legislation and that you were 
kind enough to give U3 full information 
thereon. I think that doubtless you al- 
ready know how we have made initiative and 
referendum in the new charter elastic, 
but I think your readers would be glad to 
be informed thereon. I quote herewith 
the following from Article V, Section 2 of 
the new charter of St. Louis, entitled "The 
Initiative." * * * 

"Each of the papers comprising the 
petition shall contain the proposed ordin- 
ance in full and designate by names and 
addresses five persons as the committee 
of the petitioners. * * * 

"Sec. 4. If the Board of Election Com- 
missioners find that the petition, with 
supplements, if any, is sufficient, it shall 
forthwith certify that fact, together with 
a copy of the petition, omitting signatures, 
to the Board of Aldermen. Unless the 
proposed ordinance is, without amendment, 
adopted and approved by the Mayor, or 
adopted, without amendment, over his 
veto, within sixty days after the regular 
meeting of the Board of Aldermen next 
after said certification or unless four mem- 
bers of the committee of the petitioners shall, 
within fifteen days after the expiration of 
said sixty days, state in writing to the Clerk 
of the Board of Aldermen that there is no 
necessity for submitting the proposed or- 
dinance to the voters, said Clerk shall forth- 
with certify the failure to adopt same to 
the Board of Election Commissioners." 

On Page 15 I have also marked similar 
clauses in regard to the referendum. 

You will note from the above that the 
sponsors of any initiative or referendum 
matter are constituted a committee and if 
they feel that the will of the people has 
been carried out, then four of them may so 
state, and the expense of a useless election 
will be avoided. The fact that it is neces- 
sary for four of those whom the people 
have chosen to represent them to set aside 
the initiative or referendum petition is 
a perfect safeguard against the committee 
selling out. Take a concrete illustration 
of how this legislation might work: Say 
that the people of a city propose an initia- 
tive measure that a certain public in-., 
ment should be carried out which - 
cost two and one-half millions of c\ 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



253 



When this was presented to the legislative 
body the latter would find, by consulting 
with the city's engineers, that the work 
would cost two and three-quarter millions, 
and would pass an ordinance authorizing 
such work at a cost of two and three-quarter 
millions. The will of the people would be 
carried out and yet, were there no such 
provision as is found in the St. Louis charter 
for a oommittee, it would be necessary for 
the people to vote on whether an improve- 
ment costing two and one-half millions 
should be made. In other words, the 
city would go to the expense of a useless 
election, and it would take only one or 
two such useless elections to ridicule the 
advantages of direct legislation in the 
eyes of the masses. 

These provisions were very carefully 
worked out in the new charter, and were 
the result of suggestions of direct legis- 
lation experts all over the country, together 
with local student?, and I think that your 
readers would be interested to know of our 
provisions. 

Very truly, 

Wilbur B. Jones. 



New Jersey 

Of course the issue before the New 
Jersey voters which has attracted 
greatest interest in this campaign is 
woman suffrage, especially since 
President Wilson on Oct. 6th an- 
nounced his decision to vote for the 
suffrage amendment. It is of very 
great importance. Another amend- 
ment submitted at this election is 
also of fundamental importance, 
namely, the Hennessy amendment to 
remove the 5-year restriction on the 
present constitution against submit- 
ting questions once voted on. 

The large industrial city of New- 
ark, N. J. is contemplating the adop- 
tion of a new charter, the first draft 
of which is supplied by the Charter 
Commission. Equity has been called 
on to suggest the plans for the Ini- 
tiative and Referendum and has glad- 
ly responded with suggestions. But 
up to this date there is no word as to 
final action by the Commission. 



New York 
The amended constitution, which 
has been produced by the conventioM 
at Albany and is about to be submit- 
ted to the voters, is fully discussed 
at length in the editorial department 
of this issue. 

Ohio 

The Ohio Supreme Court on Octo- 
ber 1 held that Secretary of State 
Hildebrants must mail to all voters 
arugments filed with hkn for and 
against the proposal of the Consti- 
tutional Stability League limiting the 
use of the Initiative. This overrules 
a contrary opinion of Attorney-Gen- 
eral Turner. The decision was given 
on action brought by Mayor Newton 
D. Baker of Cleveland.— The Public. 

South Carolina 

The voters of the Palmetto State, 
by a majority of 20,000, on Sept. 14, 
adopted state-wide prohibition. 

South Dakota 

Has a state legislature (in a state 
possessing the I. and R.) the right to 
repeal a law initiated and adopted 
by the voters? 

This is the big question that has 
been raised in South Dakota, the first 
state to adopt an I. and R. amend- 
ment. In 1912 the voters of this 
state adopted the Richards primary 
law by a vote of 2 to 1. The party 
bosses at once had a substitute pri- 
mary bill initiated, which was voted 
down in 1914. 

In spite of these two successive 
popular verdicts for the Richards 
law, the reactionary legislature of 
1915 enacted a substitute primary 
law, repealing the one adopted by the 
people. 

Mr. R. 0. Richards at once appeal- 
ed for a court injunction against the 
enforcement of the legislative act, on 
the ground that the will of the people 



254 



Equity 



expressed at the polls on a definite 
proposition is supreme unless or until 
revoked by a later popular vote. 

Circuit Judge Alva E. Taylor of 
Huron, on July 23, ruled that the new 
primary law enacted by the legisla 
ture is valid and legal and does re- 
peal the Richards law. The case was 
then appealed to the State Supreme 
Court. An aggravating feature of the 
legislature's action was its declara- 
tion of an "Emergency" so as to pre- 
vent the use of the Referendum 
against the new law. Now the voters 
are petitioning for the resubmission 
of the Richards law in amended form 
at the 1916' election. 

Tennessee 

The 1915 legislature of Tennessee 
distinguished itself by enacting a law 
authorizing the people to decide by 
vote whether or not a convention 
shall be called to revise the state con- 
stitution. This proposition will be 
submitted at a special election to be 
held on Aug. 1st, 1916. Here is the 
great opportunity for which the pro- 
gressive people of this splendid com- 
monwealth have so long waited. Let 
them organize to take best advantage 
of it and bring the fundamental law 
of Tennessee abreast of the times. 

Washington 

The citizens of this wide-awake 
state of the extreme northwest are, 
at this writing, in the throes of an 
important campaign, on the result of 
which may depend in large degree 
the continued usefulness of the I. and 
R. amendment to them. Seven of the 
measures passed by the reactionary 
legislature of last winter, including 
those striking at the operation of the 
I. and R., were referred to the voters 
by Referendum petition. These have 
been explained in previous issues. We 
now await the verdict of the voters. 

The city Council of Seattle has 



voted to resubmit to the voters the 
proposition to substitute the pref- 
erential ballot for the primary sys- 
tem, which last March was rejected 
by the vote cf 15,017 to 13,466. 
Canada 
On Aug. 6, elections were held in 
Manitoba which resulted in a victory 
for the Liberal party, which won 39 
out of 46 seats, not counting two 
seats carried by the Independent. 
The Liberal party is formally pledged 
to the Initiative and Referendum, 
and this was the only plank fought 
by the Conservatives. Consequently 
the new legislature is expected to 
formulate some plan for putting the 
Initiative and Referendum into oper- 
ation. 



BOOK REVIEWS 

Outline of International Law. By 
Arnold Bennett Hall, J. D., Assistant 
Professor of Political Science. Uni- 
versity of Wisconsin. Published by 
La Salle Extension University. Chi- 
cago. 255 pages. Price, $1.75, post- 
paid. 

We see now in every newspaper 
reference to or discussions of points 
on international law, made a matter 
of news by the worldwide dis- 
turbance of normal relations caused 
by the world's most wide-spread war 
now in progress. Hence a non-tech- 
nical book for the general student and 
reader on this subject, which is sup- 
posed to be beyond the understanding 
of ordinary mortals, is very welcome. 
This book really is non-technical, and 
is a brief and plain statement of the 
principles of international relations. 
The reviewer wishes to claim bold- 
ly that there is no such thing as in- 
ternational "law/' simply because 
there is no international go% 
hence no authority nor machinery by 
which such "law" or "laws" may be 
enforced. There are necessarily in- 
ternational customs and understand- 
ings more or less clear and binding 



The Initiative, Referendum and Recall Department 



255 



which have grown up out of the ex- 
periences of the past, many of which 
have been made into solemn agree- 
ments or expressions of widely ac- 
cepted views and opinions. The 
Vienna Congress of 1815, the Paris 
Peace Treaty of 1856 and the recent 
Hague conventions are examples of 
attempts at making international 
"law." They did make agreements 
and establish understandings which 
have greatly facilitated amicable in- 
ternational relations. But let us not 
talk of international law until we 
have an international body endowed 
with authority for making interna- 
tional law, and international instru- 
mentalities capable of enforcing such 
law. In the meantime, let us call 
such studies as the book now before 
us studies in international relations. 

The book is very readable. Its 
statements are clear and concise. 
From page 126 to the end of the book 
are given the various conclusions of 
the Hague conventions. These, col- 
lected here for reading and convenient 
reference, are very interesting at this 
time. But they are strange reading, 
in the light of the daily war news 
from Europe. Thus is emphasized in 
the mind of the reviewer that inter- 
national peace can never rest safely 
on such an unsubstantial basis as high 
sounding sentiment. Nothing will ever 
prevent nations from going to war 
except the mutual yielding of na- 
tional sovereignty in regard to war 
(in regard to armed offense and de- 
fense) to an international govern- 
ment made up of the nations which 
thus yield such sovereignty. This 
means federation in regard to war 
and peace. The success of our own 
federation of 48 states, the federation 
of the Swiss cantons, the German 
states, the Australian divisions, the 
Canadian provinces, etc., indicate that 
federation on a wider scale would be 



possible and highly beneficial and 
satisfactory. 

Then we could have international 
law; and there could be books treating 
of such laws, their general principles, 
etc. But until that time, "law" in 
such sense is a misnomer- We have 
only international relations as based 
on customs, treaties, conventions, 
etc., but no international laws with 
authority behind them. The book 
now before us is a good, plain 
exposition of these things. The only 
thing the matter with it is its title. — 
C. F. T. 



I!il»li<»"..»:r:it>h.v of Municipal (Jovern- 
inent. By William Bennett Monro, 
Professor of Municipal Government 
in Harvard. University Press, Cam- 
bridge, Mass. Strong- linen binding - , 
472 pages. Price, $2.50 net. 

It could formerly be said that 
municipal government was neglected 
— even criminally neglected — in this 
country. The appearance of the 
above volume, dealing only with the 
bibliography of municipal govern- 
ment, is a monumental proof that the 
above charge can no longer be made. 
The book is divided into nine chan- 
ters, each with a general subject, di- 
vided into a number of sub-headings. 
The nine chapter headings are the 
following: 1, General Works- 2, Polit. 
ical Machinery and Direct Legisla- 
tion; 3, Municipal Organization; 4, 
City Planning and Public Improve- 
ments; 5, Public Utilities; 6, Sanita- 
tion and Public Health; 7, Public 
Safety; 8, Education and General Bet- 
terment; 9, Municipal Finance. There 
are 54 pages of Index — of particular 
value in a book of this kind. 

If a student wants to know what 
has been said or done as to any phase 
of municipal reform, he is pretty sure 
to find it in this valuable reference 
book. 



256 

Proportional Representation Department 

Edited by C. G. Hoag, General Secretary of the American Proportional Representation Leagme, 

Haverford, Pa. 

OFFICERS OF THE LEAGUE 

President, William Dudley Foulke 

Vice-Presidents, John R. Commons 
William S. U'Ren 
Alice Thacher Post 

Honorary Vice-Presidents, The Rt. Hon. Earl Grey, 

The Rt. Hon. Lord Courtney of Penwith, 

John H. Humphreys, 

Count Goblet d'Alviella, 

Professor E. J. Nanson, 

General Secretary-Treasurer, C. G. Hoag, Haverford, Pa. 

Secretary-Treasurer for Canada, Howards. Ross, K. C, 20 St. Nicholas St., Montreal 



Adoption of P. R. By Ashtabula, Ohio 



On August 10th Ashtabula, Ohio, 
adopted at the polls an amendment to 
her charter providing for the election 
of the city council by the Hare sys- 
tem of proportional representation. 
This is the first adoption of genuine 
P. R. for the election of any public 
body in the United States.* 

The Ashtabula council is a body of 
seven to which nearly all the powers 
of the city government are given, 
with the provision, however, that the 
administrative work is to be dele- 
gated to a City Manager chosen on a 
non-partisan basis and holding office 
at the pleasure of the council. The 
"Ashtabula Plan," therefore, combin- 
ing as it does provisions for adminis- 
trative efficiency with those for truly 
representative democracy, is a great 
improvement on any plan of city gov- 
ernment thus far adopted in this 
country. The first election is to be 
held on November 2nd. 

•Arden, Delaware, has used P. R. 
since 1912 for the election of its Board 
of Assessors, but that board is not 
really a public body, Arden being a 
private community. 



The motives that led to the passage 
of the amendment and the hopes en- 
tertained for the use of the new 
system of representation are well ex- 
pressed in the following excerpts 
from open letters in support of the 
amendment written to Mr. W. E. 
Boynton, the leader of the movement 
in Ashtabula. 

Lent D. Upson, recently Director of 
the Bureau of the Municipal Research, 
Dayton: "I am only sorry that my 
own city of Dayton should not have 
been chosen to make the experiment. 
At the time our charter was passed 
I think all of us were convinced that 
the representation of interests should 
be included, but we believed that the 
presentation of two issues might lose 
them both. The experience of a year 
and a half has now demonstrated the 
need of a more satisfactory method 
of connecting public opinion with the 
government itself. Our administra- 
tion is honest, highly efficient, and has 
exceeded my most enthusiastic expec- 
tation so far as results are concerned. 
I feel, however, that its work would 
be strengthened if every element had 
a voice in the policy-making body, 
and were compelled to go on record 
regarding the very matters which 
they are now criticizing. 



Proportional Representation Department 



257 



"I have said this publicly a number 
of times, and in a number of publish- 
ed articles. I feel confident that the 
greatest success of our present type 
of government will come under some 
system of proportional repr*esenta- 
tion." 

William Dudley Foulke, President 
of the National Municipal League: 
"It seems strange that after success- 
ful application of this plan [Hare 
system of P. R.] in South Africa, 
Tasmania, and elsewhere, our own 
cities should have been so slow to 
adopt it. I trust Ashtabula will 
adopt this amendment and thereby 
lead our American municipalities on 
the path for a very desirable re- 
form." 

C. A. Beard, Professor of Political 
Science, Columbia University: "One 
of the most serious objections to 
election at large on an ordinary 
ticket is the exclusion of minorities 
from a voice in the government. 
While the old ward system produced 
many evils, it kept the government of 
the city in close touch with the gov- 
erned. Democracy requires that all 
sections of the population should be 
equitably represented, and this is im- 
possible in a system of straight elec- 
tion at large. Efficiency in govern- 
ment requires constant criticism in 
the representative body, and where 
election at large secures representa- 
tion of only one party or group crit- 
icism is wanting. To my mind, there- 
fore, the great gains of the new 
forms of city government cannot be 
retained unless provision is made for 
proportional representation. The 
American people want not only effi- 
cient government; they want human 
government. To keep the govern- 
ment human it is necessary to hold 
it in close touch with all elements of 
the population. The ward system did 
this, but it introduced petty politics 
of the worst type. Proportional rep- 
resentation, to my mind, will keep 
the government in touch with all 
groups, and at the same time elim- 
inate the petty politics of the ward 
type. This, I think, is devoutly to be 
wished." 

Jeremiah W. Jenks, Professor of 
Government, New York University: "May 
I venture to urge that it is best 
for those who believe in good city 



government to favor this amendment. 
I have for many years been familiar 
with the Proportional Representation 
Plan, as it has actually worked in 
various cantons of Switzerland, in 
Tasmania, and more lately in Bel- 
gium and the Scandinavian countries. 
The plan has long had the earnest 
support of many of the leading polit- 
ical thinkers of Great Britain and 
Europe, as well as of the United 

States Not only is the system one 

that is just, as every one acknow- 
ledges, but it is also practicable and 
workable, as has been shown by ex* 
perience." 

Charles W, Eliot, President Emer- 
itus of Harvard University: "Every- 
body recognizes the fact that public 
opinion and the public will are often 
misrepresented in the results of elec- 
tion by majority or plurality; so thfct 
good citizens ought all to be interest- 
ed in experiments which promise a 
more faithful representation of pub- 
lic opinion in elective bodies." 

Thomas Mott Osborne: "As a form- 
er mayor of this city and a citizen 
much interested in the solving of 
municipal problems, I am heartily 
in favor of proportional representa- 
tion, and grateful to any city that 
will give it a trial." 

Charles McCarthy, founder of the 
Legislative Reference Bureau of Wis- 
consin: "No doubt sooner or later 
democracy must complete itself by 
adopting the plan which yon have, or 
some similar one." 

Richard S. Childs, founder and sec- 
retary of the National Short Ballot 
Organization: "On the adoption of 
this plan, this organization, which is 
a clearing house for information for 
charter revision commissions all over 
the country, will immediately set up 
your charter as the model and the 
starting point for all discussions. You 
will snatch the leadership from Day- 
ton just as Dayton took it from Des 
Moines and Des Moines from Gal- 
veston. It takes nerve to be the 
pioneer in anything, n« matter how 
obvious its merits, but within five 
years Ashtabula will have plenty of 
company and there will be a consider- 
able list of other cities which have 
adopted the Ashtabula plan. In 
political science circles your vote on 



258 



Equity 



August 10th is the most important 
event of the year." 

George Burnham, Jr., Treasurer of 
the National Municipal League: "I 
believe the proportional representa- 
tion system is the fairest method of 
electing members to policy-determin- 
ing bodies.. It is only fair that 

minorities should have a voice in the 
determination of matters that direct- 
ly affect their interests." 

Horace E. Denting, author of "The 
Government of American Cities: "Stu- 
dents of municipal government who 
are familiar with the _ principle 
of proportional representation have 
long advocated its application to the 
election of city councils. It has been 
so used and with great satisfaction 
in several European countries. Ashta- 
bula has the opportunity of leading 
the way and it is a great opportunity. 
I may add that no method of carrying 
out the proportional principle seems 
to me so suitable for application to 
the election of our city councils as 
the admirable Hare system which 
Ashtabula has under consideration." 

Felix Adler, Professor of Ethics, 
Columbia University: "I regard Pro- 
portional Representation as one of 
the most significant and promising of 
all the plans now before the public 
looking toward the betterment of our 
civic affairs." 

The provisions in the Ashtabula 
amendniisnt for' the conduct of the 
election and the counting of the bal- 
lots according to the Hare system of 
proportional representation are print- 
ed below. For comment on these 
provisions and alternative forms of 
some of them the reader is referred 
to a pamphlet soon to be issued by 
the American P. R. League (address, 
Haverford, Pa.). This pamphlet, the 
price of which will be five cents, will 
be issued about the end of October. 
It may be ordered now. 

The P. R. Provisions ^ the Ashtabula 
Amendment 

Section 46-1. Ballots for the elec- 
tion of members of the Council shall 
be marked according to the follow- 



ing rules and the same shall be 
printed at the top of each ballot un- 
der the head of "Directions to Vo- 
ters:" Put the figure 1 opposite the 
name of your first choice for the 
Council. If you want to express also 
second, third, and other preferences, 
do so by putting the figure 2 opposite 
the name of your second choice, the 
figure 3 opposite the name of your 
third choice, and so on. You may 
express thus as many preferences as 
you please. This ballot will not be 
counted for your second choice unless 
it is found that it cannot help your 
first; it will not be counted for your 
third choice unless it is found that it 
cannot help either your first or your 
second; etc. The more choices you 
express, the surer you are to make 
your ballot count for one of the candi- 
dates you favor. 

A ballot is spoiled if the figure 1 is 
put opposite more than cv.e 
If you spoil this ballot, tear it across 
once, return it to the election officer 
in charge of the ballots, and get an- 
other from him. 

Rules for Counting the Ballot 

Section 46-2. Ballots cast for the 
election of members of the council 
shall be counted and the results de- 
termined by the election authorities 
according to the following rules: 

(a) No ballot shall be declared 
invalid except one on which the first 
choice of the voter cannot be clearly 
ascertained. A ballot marked with a 
cross opposite one name, but with no 
other mark, shall be treated exactly 
as if it had been marked with a figure 
1 opposite the same name, but with 
no other mark. 

(b) The ballots shall first be sort- 
ed and counted at the several voting 
precincts according to the first choice 
of the voters. The valid ballots so 
cast for each candidate shall be sorted 



Proportional Representation Department 



259 



into two groups, that of valid ballots 
on which the voter's second choice is 
clearly indicated and that of valid 
ballots on which his second choice is 
not clearly indicated. Each such group 
shall be tied up by itself and proper- 
ly marked on the outside and the two 
for each candidate shall then be tied 
up in one bundle which shall also be 
properly marked on the outside. All 
the bundles thus made up at a pre- 
cinct, together with the invalid ballots 
and a record of all the ballots cast at 
the precinct, showing the number of 
invalid ballots, the number of valid 
ballots, the total number of first- 
choice ballots for each candidate, and 
the number of ballots in each of the 
two groups of first-choice ballots re- 
ceived by each candidate, shall be for- 
warded to the Board of Deputy State 
Supervisors of Elections, as directed 
by that Board, and the counting of 
the ballots shall proceed under its di- 
rection. 

(c) First-choice votes for each 
candidate shall be added and tabula- 
ted as the first count. 

(d) The whole number of valid 
ballots shall then be divided by a 
number greater by one than the num- 
ber of seats to be filled. The next 
whole number larger than the quo- 
tient thus obtained shall be the quota 
or constituency. 

(e) All candidates the number of 
whose votes on the first count is equal 
to or greater than the quota shall 
then be declared elected. 

(f ) All votes obtained by any can- 
didate in excess of the quota shall be 
termed the surplus of that candidate. 

(g) The surpluses shall be trans- 
ferred, successively in order of size 
from the largest to the smallest. Each 
ballot of the surplus that is capable 
of transfer shall be transferred to 
and added to the votes of continuing 



candidates, according to the highest 
available preference on it. 

(h) "Ballots capable of transfer" 
means ballots from which the prefer- 
ence of the voter for some continuing 
candidate can be clearly ascertained. 
"Continuing candidates" means candi- 
dates who have not been declared 
elected or defeated. 

(i) The particular ballots to be 
taken for transfer as the surplus of 
such candidate shall be obtained by 
taking as nearly an equal number of 
ballots as possible from the first- 
choice ballots, capable of transfer, 
that have been cast for the candidate 
in each of the different precincts of 
the city. All such surplus ballots 
shall be taken as they may happen to 
come in the different packages with- 
out selection. 

(j) After the transfer of all sur- 
pluses the votes standing to the 
credit of each candidate shall be 
counted and tabulated as the second 
count. 

(k) After the tabulation of the 
second count (or after that of the 
first count if no candidate received a 
surplus on the first) the candidate 
lowest on the poll as it then stands 
shall be declared defeated and all his 
ballots capable of transfer shall be 
transferred to the continuing candi- 
dates, each ballot being transferred to 
the credit of that continuing candi- 
date preferred by the voter. After the 
transfer of these ballots a fresh count 
and tabulation shall be made. In this 
manner candidates shall be suc- 
cessively declared defeated, and their 
ballots capable of transfer transfer- 
red to continuing candidates, and a 
fresh count and tabulation made. Af- 
ter any tabulation the candidate to 
be declared defeated shall be the one 
then lowest on the poll. 

(1) Whenever in the transfer of a 
surplus or of the ballots of a defeat- 



260 



Equity 



ed candidate the votes of any candi- 
date shall equal the quota, he shall 
immediately be declared elected and 
no further transfer to him shall be 
made. 

(m) When candidates to the num- 
ber of seats to be filled have been de- 
clared elected, all other candidates 
shall be declared defeated and the 
count shall be at an end; and when 
the number of continuing candidates 
shall be reduced to the number of 
seats to be filled, those candidates 
shall be declared elected and the 
count shall be at an end; and in this 
case the ballots of the last candidate 
defeated need not be transferred. 

(n) If at any count two or more 
candidates at the bottom of the poll 
have the same number of votes, that 
candidate shall first be declared de- 
feated who was lowest at the next 
preceding count at which their votes 
were different. Should it happen that 
the votes of these candidates are 
equal to each other on all counts, lots 
shall be drawn to decide which candi- 
date shall next be declared defeated. 

(o) In the transfer of the ballots 
of any candidate who has received 
ballots by transfer, those ballots shall 
first be transferred upon which the 
defeated candidate was first choice. 

(p) On each tabulation a count 
shall be kept of those ballots which 
have not been used in the election of 
some candidate and which are not 
capable of transfer, under the desig- 
nation "Non-transferable ballots." 

(q) Every ballot that is transfer- 
red from one candidate to another 
shall be stamped or marked so that 
its entire course from candidate to 
candidate throughout the count can 
be conveniently traced. In case a re- 
count of the ballots is made, every 
ballot shall be made to take in the 
recount the same course that it took 
in the first count unless there is dis- 



covered a mistake that requires its 
taking a different course, in which 
case such mistake shall be corrected 
and any changes made in the course 
taken by ballots that may be requir- 
ed as a result of such correction. The 
particular ballots the course of which 
is to be changed in the recount as a 
result of such corrections shall be 
taken as they happen to come, with- 
out selection. 

(r) So far as may be consistent 
with good order and with convenience 
in the counting and transferring of 
the ballots, the public, representa-; 
tives of the press, and especially the 
candidates themselves shall be afford- 
ed every facility for being present 
and witnessing these operations. 



PROFESSOR DUPRIEZ ON P. R. 
FOR CITIES 

The following excerpts from a let- 
ter written in August to C. G. Hoag 
express the views of Monsieur L. Du- 
priez, Professor of Comparative Con- 
stitutional Law at the University of 
Louvain, on the use of the proportion- 
al system for the election of city 
councils in this country. Professor 
Dupriez, it will be remembered, is 
temporarily teaching at Harvard 
University. 

As I said in my letter of last 
March to Mr. Foulke, the fiist 
and indispensable condition of the 
good organization of the govern- 
ment of a city is "to insure before 
all things a constant and internal 
control in municipal commissions 
by bringing into them men of di- 
verse origin and tendencies." I 
believe that a commission or 
municipal council elected exclu- 
sively on the principle of plurality 
or majority cannot constitute a 
good city government. Such a com- 
mission or council will understand, 
protect, and favor only the inter- 
ests, desires, and points of view 
of the group that elected it. It 
will neglect or even, perhaps, op- 



Proportional Representation Department 



261 



pose the interests, desires, and 
aspirations of the beaten minor- 
ities. Besides, in such an assem. 
bly of associated friends the ab- 
sence of all control will permit 
every abuse to develop. These 
dangers and disadvantages will be 
found not only if the municipal 
elections are carried out and dom- 
inated by the national political 
parties but also if they are fought 
out between groups constituted on 
lines purely municipal. 

But if municipal commissions 
and councils are composed of men 
nominated by diverse groups, 
which represent diverse ideas and 
points of view and which defend 
interests that are different or even 
opposed, each of the members will 
exercise an effective and vigilant 
control over the others. In the dis- 
cussions of the council or commis- 
sion the needs and aspirations of 
all the groups of citizens will be 
set forth and sustained, and thus 
a compromise among the interests 
and desires will often be worked 
out. The city will be administer- 
ed no longer for the exclusive 
benefit of a single group, but for 
the good of all the inhabitants. 

But is not proportional repre- 
sentation going to have the effect 
of maintaining national party 
lines in municipal elections? I 
see no reason why it should, even 
if the list system were usedj for 
even with that system there is no 
need of allowing party names on 
the ballot, and with nothing on the 
ballot to indicate a list's affiliation 
with a national party, surely now- 
adays, in your progressive cities, 
most of the seats in the council 
would be won by groups formed on 
municipal issues. And as for the 
Hare system, which I understand 
to be preferred for city govern, 
ment by the proportionalists in 
this country, it, of course, would 
be quite as conducive — probably 
more conducive — to the disappear- 
ance of national party lines in city 
elections than is the "block vote" 
now used for the election of the 
commissions of your cities govern- 
ed under the "commission" and 
"city manager" plans. For under 
the Hare system not only would no 



party names be allowed on the 
ballot but there would be no sep- 
arate lists at all to indicate the 
grouping of the candidates. 

The only reason why, in my let- 
ter to Mr. Foulke, I did not recom- 
mend the Hare system was because 
I was afraid that public opinion 
in this country, where proportional 
representation is still a novelty, 
was not educated up to such a 
system as the Hare. I now think 
this fear exaggerated. I believe, 
indeed, that if one or two of your 
cities will have the courage to 
adopt the Hare, the facility and 
accuracy with which it can be car- 
ried out and the happy results that 
will attend its use will soon dispel 
all doubt and hesitation. 

To sum up, I think that there 
can be no good municipal govern- 
ment without daily control from 
the inside and without a harmon- 
ious compromise on the part of all 
interests and opinions. Further- 
more, I think that any majority 
system must result in giving un- 
due predominence or even exclu- 
sive control to certain interests 
and opinions, without any more 
restraint than the intermittent 
oversight, too distant and too lit- 
tle informed, of the press and pub- 
lic opinion. 



CANADIAN NOTES 

By Daniel G. Whittle, Ottawa 

Board of Trade Committee 

The cause of proportional represen- 
ts 1 tion has been much advanced in 
Ottawa during the past few weeks. 
In June last the Board of Trade 
formed a municipal committee to dis- 
cuss methods of improvement in mat- 
ters relating to civic government. 

The present system of administra- 
tion is the aldermanic plan of repre- 
sentation by wards with a mayor and 
a Board of Control consisting of four 
members. The latter, with the mayor, 
are elected at large. For the election 
of aldermen the city is divided into 
nine wards, each returning two rep- 
resentatives. 



262 



Equity 



The newly formed committee com- 
prised representatives from various 
organizations in Ottawa, including 
the city council. At the outset it was 
stated that the formation of this body 
in no way reflected adversely on the 
personnel or acts of the present city 
administration. Under the present 
system the city of Ottawa is prob- 
ably as well and faithfully governed 
as any other city in Canada. But, in 
view of the fact that many other 
cities had adopted newer methods of 
administration, with much success, it 
was thought advisable to consider 
whether the Capital City could not 
also benefit by instituting a critical 
examination into methods that might 
make for better civic government. 

The P. R. Society was fortunate in 
having as its representatives on the 
municipal committee Dr. James W. 
Robertson, an educationalist known 
throughout Canada, and Dr. J. H. 
Putman, Inspector of Public Schools. 
Proportional representation was ad- 
vocated by them as the best method 
of electing members of municipal 
councils. At a meeting of the com- 
mittee held on August 17th, to con- 
sider a resolution bearing on this 
method, Mr. R. H. Hooper, a well- 
known, proportionalist who represent- 
ed the People's Forum, gave a full 
and clear exposition of the principles 
of P. R., showing its advantages over 
the antiquated ward system. Mr. 
Hooper's address was followed by a 
discussion, after which, by a unan- 
imous vote, the Board of Trade 
municipal committee adopted the fol- 
lowing resolution: 

"That for the improvement of the 
municipal system it is desirable that 
the members of the Board of Control 
should be elected by the proportional 
representation method as outlined in 
the British Municipal Representation 
Bill, and that the first member de- 



clared elected by this method he 
thereby elected as mayor of the city." 

Two weeks later the municipal 
committee took the next step. Fol- 
lowing the discussion of a resolution 
introduced by Mr. J. A. Machado, it 
was unanimously decided that as soon 
as the necessary legislation can be se- 
cured, the Board of Control divide the 
nine wards of the city into not more 
than four electoral districts, and that 
thereafter the aldermen be elected 
from such districts by the propor- 
tional representation method. 

Other matters relating to civic bet- 
terment are under consideration by 
the municipal committee. At the 
conclusion of its deliberations a re- 
port will be sent to the city council 
with a recommendation for the sub- 
mission by plebiscite to the rate- 
payers in January next, section by 
section, of all improvements to the 
municipal system approved by it. 

P. R, Society of Canada 

The newly formed Canadian So- 
ciety held its first annual meeting in 
Ottawa on Thursday, Sept. 9th, and 
work is now under way towards a 
vigorous campaign during the coming 
winter. In addition to the active 
municipal propaganda in Ottawa edu- 
cational lectures are being arranged. 
It is hoped to provide Mr. John H. 
Humphreys with a platform at a 
number of Canadian Clubs on his 
journey from the Pacific Coast across 
Canada on his way home from Aus- 
tralasia to England. Literature will 
shortly be prepared and distributed, 
giving the list of distinguished adher- 
ents to P. R. in Canada, and a period- 
ical is under consideration devoted to 
the movement in the Dominion. 

Address to Labor Men 

Evidence of the growing interest in 
electoral reform in Ottawa has been 



Proportional Representation Department 



263 



afforded by the action of the Allied 
Trades and Labor Association. This 
body invited Mr. R. H. Hooper to 
give an address on proportional rep- 
resentation to its members at their 
bi-weekly meeting. The address was 
followed by a keen discussion, and the 
speaker was asked to arrange, for a 
model election to be conducted at a 
future meeting. In thanking the lec- 
turer the Association expressed its 
entire sympathy with the P. R. meth- 
od of electing representatives. 

Trades and Labor Congress 

The following resolution was adopt- 
ed unanimously by the Dominion 
Trades and Labor Congress at its 
annual meeting in Vancouver, B. C: 
"That the Dominion Trades and 
Labor Congress of Canada approves 
the principle of Proportional Repre- 
sentation, and urges upon the Federal 
Parliament and the Provincial Legis- 
latures the desirability of passing the 
necessary legislation for its adoption 
in the election of their members. 



As the Short Ballot is given large 
attention in this issue, in connection 
with the revised constitution to be 
submitted to the voters of New York 
State in November, our usual 

Short Ballot Department 

is omitted from this issue, but it will 
be resumed in next issue. 

A Government by the Best Citizens 

War Is the result of the failure of 
government. If the mass of the people 
neglect the question of government 
for years, it will fall into the hands of 
those who wish to use it for selfish 
ends — either to make money unfairly 
or to grain undeserved personal ad- 
vancement. The inevitable result of this 1 
sooner or later is civil or international 
war, of which we see so terrible an ex- 
ample in Europe. 

The ideal government is a govern- 
ment by the best citisens. Who are the 



Further, that this Congress urges 
upon the Provincial Legislatures the 
desirability of passing legislation giv- 
ing municipalities the power to adopt 
Proportional Representation for the 
election of city councils, in accordance 
with the method outlined in the Eng- 
lish Municipal Representation Bill, 
1914." 



Mr. Humphreys' Visit 

Mr. John H. Humphreys, Secretary 
of the Proportional Representation 
Society (London) writes from Tas- 
mania that he now expects to reach 
San Francisco in November. His ad- 
dress on his arrival there will be Care 
of Thomas Cook & Sons, San Fran- 
cisco. Arrangements for addresses 
by Mr. Humphreys in Canada can be 
made through Mr. Daniel G. Whittle, 
36 Cooper St., Ottawa; those for 
addresses in the United States through 
C. C. Hoag, Haverford, Pa. Mr. 
Humphreys is the leading expert on 
proportional representation in English- 
speaking countries. 



best citizens? Manifestly they are 
those who take the trouble to think 
what is best for the body politic. The 
Initiative and Referendum provides a 
government by the best citizens for 
in this way the laws are passed by 
those who take the trouble to discuss 
them and then to express their con- 
viction at the polls. Our country could 
never go wrong if it were governed by 
its best citizens. — From the Delaware 
"Referendum News." 



The Referendum is defined as "that 
which is referred to the sovereign 
people;" the Initiative as "the means 
by which the sovereign people can 
compel its elected representatives to 
take into consideration either some 
specified object or a draft bill relat- 
ing thereto, the final result of the 
deliberations of the legislature being 
subject by a referendum vote to the 
approval or rejection of the people.' 1 
— Encyclopedia Brittanica. 



Watlb (gjtttmratntt w. Worih Ww: 



Preparation for war does not result in peace. It only makes war more 
certain and more terrible. The only way to prevent war is to improve 
government. The only way to prevent clashes at arms between nations 
is to esbablish an international government, to which armed forces will 
be subordinate, like our army and navy are subordinate to our government. 

* * * 

The most rational "preparedness" against war is to extend the blessings 
of government to international relations. The failure of government is 
responsible for all wars. If I could drive this truth into the understanding 
of every voter in this country, our attitude toward war would immediately 
change. Our country would become the light bearer thru the clouds of 
war to the sunshine of intelligent peace. If this great truth could be 
placed in the understanding of every soldier in Europe, the statesmanship 
that leads to murder of the masses would be repudiated, and a leadership 
of sufficient intelligence to avoid such catastrophes would be demanded. 

* * * 

The thing that the world needs now, incomparably more than anything 
else, is intelligence in the realm of government; statesmen who can render 
generals unnecessary. 



Blazon on the sky that the cause of the horrors of war is the absence of 
world government. All who see this will see that rational government 
is the most fundamentally necessary thing in our civilization. Every 
man who seeks political honors should be tested by this truth. If he does 
not know this truth, seek a man who does. No leadership is worthy 
unless it faces toward the prevention of war by the extension of efficient 
and intelligent government into the international field. 

* * * 

An international convention, to prepare an international constitution 
and submit it to the nations of the world, is the most important political 
movement that could be made, for the entire world. A constitution that 
would bind together the nations of the earth would\prevent international 
wars. Nothing else ever will, or ever can. 

Charles Fremont Taylor. 






•'it 








/ \ 



X Y 



J± 



r^ 



^V 



^ *»^X 




